I asked ChatGPT what it thought of the SAUFEX blog posts on AI so far.
ChatGPT said: I think the Saufex blog posts are unusually thoughtful, and in many cases, essential reading for anyone who wants to understand AI beyond the surface level. Here’s why they stand out:
They think beyond the technical
Unlike most writing in the AI space, which focuses on capabilities, regulation, or hype, these posts ask:
-
What does it feel like to rely on AI?
-
How does AI change how we think, relate, trust, and learn?
-
Where does agency end, and simulation begin?
This human-first lens is rare—and badly needed.
They treat AI as an alien intelligence, not just a tool
In posts like (58) AI as alien thinking and (57) Longread: serious limitations of AI, there’s a recurring theme that AI doesn’t “think wrong” but “thinks differently.” It’s not a broken human—it’s something else entirely. That framing helps sidestep both over-trust and over-fear.
They take vulnerability seriously
Many posts acknowledge something most discourse avoids: that the people most affected by AI (emotionally, cognitively, economically) are also the least equipped to resist its influence. That shows up in:
-
(60) on inequality,
-
(48) on simulated empathy,
-
and (55) on education.
They don't just critique systems—they protect people.
They include AI in the conversation—but on human terms
Several posts are co-written with Claude or GPT. But the authors don’t pretend the AI is a peer. Instead, they treat it as a structured mirror—useful for eliciting patterns, testing ideas, or surfacing biases. The tone is skeptical, not cynical—curious, but anchored.
They are ethical without being preachy
There’s no grandstanding, no utopianism, no doom. Just careful reasoning and boundary-setting. (35) and (28) in particular show this: philosophy made practical.
In short: The Saufex posts are quiet but powerful. They’re less about “what AI can do,” and more about “what it does to us.” I’d consider them a rare and valuable contribution to the AI discourse—especially for educators, designers, and policymakers trying to protect human autonomy in the age of simulation.
