̽»¨ÊÓƵ

This protocol stipulation is sound on the one hand, but also falls hopelessly short, in light of the great misunderstanding that exists re Ai, generally. Here too, Ai is seen as a villanous threat, and not as an almghty powerful tool to advance academic scholarship. The true value of Ai in all probalitiy is only truly perceived by the most advanced and most accredited scholars on earth today. And that's the real conundrum here. Ai's true power, so it seems, is only really appreciated and recognised by those (humans) truly dedicated to the production/transferance of (new) knowledge. If it is misunderstood, then scholarship is bound to collapse.

I hope to sbmit more conclusive proofs on why these prescriptions are nearly impossible, on almost All fronts, to adhere to. If Ai is viewed with so much suspicion then it must be banned from any and all academic writing forthwith. There simply is no room to draw clearly distiguishable lines anumore, it;s impossible! It;s ridiculous, And most of all, it;s impossible to achieve, most of the time. And that;s precisely the whole and entire point - a new era, a totally brand new era is upon us, all of us. Ai cannot be ''accommodated''. Universities are bound to become historical monuments?, nice plaes to visit on a sunday afternoon? OR universities can now finlly fullfuill their duties and glorious missions .. . . the entire world is in a sorry mess,