I havnt read almost any of this thread, but the main concern I have is that unless I am getting Chicago style sources from the AI, I will not trust it, and even then, in the academic field, its a requirement to have multiple sources. But to get to the point I wanna get to, sometimes when it comes to information, their is literally nothing like have multiple books all explaining the same thing. But the great thing is, each person approaches it differently, uses different vocabulary and examples and random ways of explaining it.
My case and point, when Im struggling with some types of verb conjugations (such as passive/causative) a some months back, I for the life of me couldnt remember the form it took. Come about to a book I have “The Handbook of Japanese Verbs” written by Kamiya Taeko and it helped me make sense that its always the negative form.
For some reason other sources don’t word it or explain it in a way that always sticks, but that particular book does. Because of the way it is situated, it splits the grammar and verbs into the respect forms. So since pass/caus are always negative they are in the negative section of verbs. That helped it click when Im doin my reviews or reading. and (Oh, because its in negative form its perceived as a bad thing.
It helps explain how each Godan verb changes and why that particular form is used for the okurigana in following grammar too which is really nice. Whereas other sources do that, but often get tripped up with jumping around other grammar points too.
So while I have plenty of issues with AI and a lot of it is because only the rich will benefit from it in the long run(because I dont trust almost ANY government to properly regulate it to ensure that Art in all its online forms is not destroyed), while continuing to decrease literacy ect, because so many people are already lazy.
Anyway, sometimes just an honest to god book is the best option. As many as possible from as many different people as possible.