Take a step back and your reply basically says:

All of you here that hate AI and have a negative sentiment towards it are wrong.

There is nothing wrong with AI.

You're simply using it wrong, it's a skill issue.

If people didn't have this skill issue, like they did with Google when it first came out, then people would not have a problem with AI.

Your comment implies the issue with AI is people misunderstanding it, while ignoring all the other massive downsides, both environmentally and socially.

Google situation is not the same as AI. Google replaced your library index, nobody liked trawling through index cards at a library. AI is looking to replace technical expertise. People like having tecnhical expertise, and they like using it, it feels nice and makes you money.

Your comment above is being downvoted because this:

That's because they do not know how to use AI correctly,

seems to imply that there is a correct way to use AI.

In the context of the current generation of labor theft algorithms and surveillance tools, the only correct way to interact with them is as a conscientious objector - which is to say, abject refusal on moral grounds.

Failure to abstain from the use of LLMs and their ilk indicates either:

1. Ignorance of the damage being done by these algorithms, their training, and the corporations that develop and operate them (have you somehow been living under a rock?)

-or-

2. Complete moral and good sense judgment failure of the individual.

I suppose I’ll never understand why comments are upvoted or downvoted. Sometimes I get the impression that it’s more down to chance or mistakes.