You're way too entrenched in your views because of your background in academic research. Most people don't have the time or interest for that. For me, it's a starting point, & I don't confine it to single source. (to address your view that Musk is some kind of Svengali figure). The point I made was it's a better option than engaging in emotional discussions with peers but also from just as manipulative legacy news sources. I agree with you it's dangerous to rely on the positions expressed and take them as gospel. It's a beginning, not an end. Just like you don't religiously follow your mates in the pub, social media chat rooms, X/ Bluesky & the like or rely on a single news source. But I enjoy a discussion without it ending up in name calling & emotional responses and, I'll repeat, righteous indignation (e.g., slagging anyone who questions a pre-formulated position). I've lost friends that way.

One example I'll give is I recently had a discussion with ChatGPT on the significance of Howard Lutnick's panel presentation at WEF, and Rachel Reeves' response. We got to depths I have yet to see in mainstream publications. That's not to say they're not out there, just that I haven't discovered them. I get blank stares when mentioning it to friends & family, they have no idea & no interest.

A quick comment on your preference for academic research, I believe that in can it, too, 'follow the leader', with circular references and citations & must also be rigorously challenged. Don't be such a snob. I should note that I'm now retired from an extensive tech career & not without bias, either. Let him without sin cast the first stone?

Oh, & I don't wish to challenge your overall concerns about the danger of AI. I accept it can be another tool for good or evil & should be treated as such. I'll take whatever positives I can get from it, though.