I think it is important to understand Harari's rhetorical style. He likes to "flip the script", tell long stories (without necessarily dotting
every i) and end in a punchline.
So, for example, in his book _Sapiens_ he got a warm reception to a "zinger": Humans did not tame wheat - wheat tamed humans! It's essentially a "punch line" to a long, analytical story he develops. There are several other such punch lines in that book.
So, when he concludes AI has done anything, keep in mind that he thinks that because we are (mostly) addicted to carbohydrates and this is not great for our lifestyle that a plant with no ability to cognate has "tamed" our species.
A funnier example of this is a Usenix Keynote delivered by Van Jacobson in - I think 1996. He tells an involved story about language acquisition in humans and Unix and networks and ends with a "conclusion" that using Windows makes you literally brain damaged. I wish I could find an online video of that talk, if anyone knows of one. (I'm not sure it was even recorded.)
So, for example, in his book _Sapiens_ he got a warm reception to a "zinger": Humans did not tame wheat - wheat tamed humans! It's essentially a "punch line" to a long, analytical story he develops. There are several other such punch lines in that book.
So, when he concludes AI has done anything, keep in mind that he thinks that because we are (mostly) addicted to carbohydrates and this is not great for our lifestyle that a plant with no ability to cognate has "tamed" our species.
A funnier example of this is a Usenix Keynote delivered by Van Jacobson in - I think 1996. He tells an involved story about language acquisition in humans and Unix and networks and ends with a "conclusion" that using Windows makes you literally brain damaged. I wish I could find an online video of that talk, if anyone knows of one. (I'm not sure it was even recorded.)