Starting to feel more and more like chinese room experiment
The models are confidently answering physics questions, treating it as a math problem, but they don't fundamentally "get it" and even recently failed simple "should i drive to car wash" test
The sample efficiency is just crazy low
Still surprising that even with this they managed to saturate the benchmarks
Searle's thought experiment just kicks the can down the road.
Since the room as a whole produces fluent Chinese it becomes a language philosophy debate about where meaning comes from. Brandom's inferentialism gets into this more than any normal person would ever care to read about.
LLMs really show the absurdity of the Chinese Room rulebook.
The whole thought experiment should really be left to history at this point.
Searle’s social ontology is much more interesting also but this outdated thought experiment completely overshadows his more interesting stuff.
RomanKornev · · focus · HN ↗
The models are confidently answering physics questions, treating it as a math problem, but they don't fundamentally "get it" and even recently failed simple "should i drive to car wash" test
The sample efficiency is just crazy low
Still surprising that even with this they managed to saturate the benchmarks
webern777 · · focus · HN ↗
Since the room as a whole produces fluent Chinese it becomes a language philosophy debate about where meaning comes from. Brandom's inferentialism gets into this more than any normal person would ever care to read about.
LLMs really show the absurdity of the Chinese Room rulebook.
The whole thought experiment should really be left to history at this point.
Searle’s social ontology is much more interesting also but this outdated thought experiment completely overshadows his more interesting stuff.