*What Ian Bogost says here is true, but no matter how people attempt to reformulate it, the same semantic ooze creeps in. It's like trying to jaw and argue somebody out of Aristotelian physics.
*I happen to think that "sensor-driven, data-backed machine learning systems" are a pretty big deal without the drawbacks of a metaphysical notion like "artificial intelligence," but we lack a clear language that would allow us to say that convincingly. So it's griping. It's been griping for decades on end. More griping to come. You'd think we'd be able to get out of the conceptual box on this because it's something we pride ourselves about nowadays, but it's beyond us. Calling it "science fiction" doesn't help; this isn't science fiction, we're in the grip of myth.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/03/what-is-artificial-intelligence/518547/