KIs unterscheiden sich je nach Ausbildung und Erfahrung, genau wie Sie und ich

Excerpt:

Recent commentary has described the aspiration behind large-scale AI as a “god in a box,” a single system imagined as knowing and doing everything (Tarnoff, 2026). An aspiration consistent with statements such as Musk’s that Grok will “rewrite the entire corpus of human knowledge,” adding missing information and deleting errors, and then retrain the model on that revised base (Musk, 2025b). The more serious danger, however, is not that AI is such a thing, but that people may begin to treat it as if it were. When a system is experienced as omniscient, its underlying formation, constraints, and governance can disappear from view.

A further risk arises when a monolithic system acquires not only authority but opacity. In such a case, artificial intelligence can function as a modern version of the Wizard of Oz, presenting itself as an independent, omniscient authority while concealing the human actors who shape its outputs. The concealment is not mystical. It operates through ordinary but often hidden mechanisms: the selection and exclusion of training materials, the weighting of some sources over others, reward structures that favor certain styles of response, system instructions that define permissible conduct, moderation layers that suppress disfavored outputs, retrieval systems that elevate some evidence while burying other evidence, and post-deployment interventions that can silently recalibrate the model after public controversy or institutional pressure. What the user encounters as “the system’s answer” may therefore be the endpoint of many prior human judgments that are no longer visible at the point of use.