We get to define "AI" however we like, but a definition of AI that includes a SQL planner is so broad that it includes literally all complex software.

When I wrote that a broad definition of AI "obscures more than it reveals," I meant that lumping LLMs in with SQL planners and deterministic chess bots ignores (obscures) all of the details of their implementation.

But those implementation details matter. They have big implications on the uses, limitations, and risks of the software.

As I write this, one of the top stories on HN is a story about an OpenAI model accidentally hacking itself out of Hugging Face's sandbox. SQL planners don't do that. Chess bots don't do that.

That's not to say that saying "all complex software is kinda the same, and we can call all of it AI" doesn't reveal anything. There are some similarities that all complex software has, especially as we look back on the history of complex software and the impact it has had (or not had) on labor productivity.

But, IMO, what you discover by ignoring the details is less important than what you discover by delving in.