What I mean is that there are many people commenting on HN and that makes for a large number of people who think GPT-3 is somehow "intelligent".

Sure. A lot of people believe in bigfoot though. Most of them don't matter in the space of studying primates or whatever we're calling him.

The context here was:

>> >> It is not an interesting take to say “but GPT-3 isn’t actually intelligent!”. Everyone knows.

GP showed that not "everyone knows" this.

You're quibbling, trying to move the goalposts.

I don't really care to debate semantics here. It felt clear to me that the context of "everyone" was the ML academic community. If you have a different take, that's fine.

"Not debating semantics" is, like patriotism, the eternal refuge of the scoundrel. Everything can be reduced, in the end, to "debating semantics".