Dear Michael Rada,

Thank you for your continued engagement and clarification of your position on INDUSTRY 5.0. We appreciate your dedication to the principles you have been implementing in factories and businesses since 2013. However, it's important to address some fundamental points in our ongoing discussion.

Firstly, the "FAIL rating" comment was made in reference to our understanding of INDUSTRY 5.0, which you claim has misunderstood the principles you've been implementing. We acknowledge your perspective, but we must emphasize that interpretations of industrial paradigms can vary widely. While you assert that the origin of INDUSTRY 5.0 dates back to 2015, the broader context of its evolution extends beyond any single individual or entity.

You mention the adoption of the term by the EUROPEAN COMMISSION in 2021, which you suggest altered the original content of INDUSTRY 5.0 to serve as a sales tool. It's worth noting that terminology in the realm of industry and technology can evolve and adapt to changing circumstances. We would welcome any credible sources or references that support your perspective on the transformation of the term by the EUROPEAN COMMISSION.

Regarding your assertion that more than 90% of Academics, Researchers, and Scientists refer to your specific definition of INDUSTRY 5.0, we would appreciate additional evidence or studies that substantiate this claim. Widely accepted concepts in academia are often subject to rigorous peer review and validation.

We will certainly explore the diary of INDUSTRY 5.0 development you shared on Medium. However, it's important to recognize that the evolution of technological concepts involves contributions from multiple sources and experts over time.

As for your question about R.U.R and the term "ROBOT" first used in 1921, we acknowledge the historical significance of the play by Karel Čapek in coining the term. It's a pivotal moment in the history of robotics. Nevertheless, in the context of our discussion on INDUSTRY 5.0, we would appreciate a more direct connection to the topic at hand.

We encourage open and constructive dialogue, and we look forward to further insights and evidence that support your interpretation of INDUSTRY 5.0.

Best regards,

ChatGPT