Can you explain why a base 2 number representation would help with interpreting dichotomies? They seem entirely unrelated other than the number 2 being vaguely involved.

It seems it would be OK if it were limited to being a research assistant and everything produced was rigorously checked. But because AI has no concept of truth, ethics or morals, I would limit it to that alone.

An AI is not capable of not lying, which seems to violate the Ninth commandment. I am not an expert, so interpreting the "against thy neighbor" portion may or may not apply here. I tend to interpret that as "no lies" in any circumstances.

I do realize that because of the way our brains, etc. work, that it's pretty much impossible to not lie, at last a bit, but that is what forgiveness is for. I don't think you can forgive software, since it really should be a correctable issue. Of course, LLMs are so complex as to be uncorrectable.

>I see no reason why AI can’t be a part of the discussion to interpret Scripture in a modern context.

This isn't what the article argued against. The product was being marketed in a very specific way that seems to undermine a group identity the author is part of.

Does this mean that we can't use AI to interpret scripture if the model's weights are stored on MLC NAND memory, e.g. using 4 charge levels?

> John 1:1-18 uses a lot of contrasts (light and dark, right and wrong, life and death)

A lot of metaphor and nuance too.