My thoughts keep ricocheting around the three professions. Why have the base principles remained, on the surface level, unchanged? They stitch part of the essence of being a sentient human together - health, law, and belief.
The meeting may have been the first step towards open the doors to ai automation in regards to law and/or belief. It certainly did not shut the door, if I understand correctly.
Ai, at this point of time, in its best form is nothing more than a fancy language model. It can be used within these three professions, like you mentioned, on a very superficial level. However, ai is also very immature ATM. I mean, the more data is fed to it to create more robust algorithms, the more close to humanoid decision making it will get. Once the algorithm is educated enough to create at least one singular model that is on a 1:1 "thinking" level of a human, including adapting, learning, and making exceptions, only then can the fancy language model be compared to being humanoid.
But do we need that level of reliability on ai? Where does it end? What then becomes of human beings? An eating, shitting, reproducing organism with what to look forward to?