Part of interacting with real live humans is there high likelihood of misunderstandings and or off topic responses. I realize it can be frustrating but one learns to cope and/or accept. On the other hand one can choose withdrawal, while this may alleviate the frustration, human discourse even the times when it goes off course may provoke new avenues of thought. I perceive many posts on social media as stream of consciousness thoughts, whatever at the top of mind gets posted, deep thoughts require time and effort, both can be in short supply in the context of social media.
I presume @unreceivedogma original post on Claude #1 which entailed a long and thorough post as to how AI had benefited him was both meaningful and impactful. At one point he mentioned something to the effect he had learned more about certain audio subject via AI than from previous human interactions. Perhaps this true in this particular instance, AI's specialty at this point in time is collating human knowledge into one concise read, the benefits are clear to see. So we have this 'relatively' long and winding post espousing multiple benefits of AI for a single user in his audio journey. I suspect some of us, and I know for myself AI had very little if anything to offer in the way of benefit in my audio journey, rather it was direct human interaction and human experiences with others that informed me. So now I see this post which offers another example of AI replacing human interaction and experience.
I'm not a Luddite and I don't appreciate being called one, I'm all for innovation but innovation without qualitative judgement is extremely flawed, one should perceive both the costs and benefits. I realize OP wasn't intended to go in this direction but humans do have critical thinking faculties, this to be expected. Perhaps interaction with AI will come to be preferred over time, one can easily find benefit without the hassles of human interaction.