>


I used to think this kind of stuff was BS since AI is no more than matrix multiplication at the end of the day, but as I've seen the power of AI art tools and ChatGPT

AI art tools are still just matrix multiplication and regression (or some similar technique).
And ChatGPT is just a fancy language model, not a compendium of all human knowledge, which is again just matrix multiplication and regression when training.

What I thought was an inherently human characteristic (creativity) has been shown to be no problem for AI.

You've yet to give a solid example of an AI being "creative". Sure, we can train AI to create things we didn't directly instruct them to make by seeding them with starting points and references, but we've yet to make an AI that can come up with its own ideas or apply known ideas to solve problems.
Even for those of us that use AI or machine learning in research, we have to find a specific program that fits the exact requirements for each one of our experiments then train it ourselves and only then do we even stand a chance at getting any useful information out of it. Even with an output that appears significant, it's often practically useless.
So no, we aren't anywhere close to AI being creative enough to come up with, execute, and extrapolate from scientific experiments. We can't even get an AI robot to wander around a room and explore without programming in an explicit "explore" function, and you think they're a few small steps away from evolving past humans and killing humanity? Nah.
You reference machines being creative. However if you look at the chatGPT subreddits, the language model is notoriously terrible at logic and reasoning games. It can’t formulate its own original arguments in order to solve a puzzle. Seems like it isn’t that creative to me.