Building up strawmen against LLMs will only make the hypers look more reasonable. A language model responds to inouts exactly as a model of anything else would. That is enough to explain all the "intelligence" without believing a model is somehow a "new kind of mind". Those who think LLMs are intelligent don't know enough about models. And those who think they are useless don't know enough about models.
Sorry but are you trying to subtly imply that if I think LLMs are intelligent, I’m probably actually just a bit stupid?
Because I would be more than happy to go head to head with you on academic and professional pedigree and credentials.
I notice you also ignore my comment that you seem to be replying to and instead post your response here. But did you have any answer to the question I asked?
Yeah, his posting history isn't promising. He's been doing the "if you think you're as smart as an LLM, you're probably right" argument for a month now.
I don't think you're gonna get much out of going back and forth here.
For what it's worth, I disagree with you that they're intelligent, but my conviction is fairly low. I don't understand intelligence as well as I would like, and it could well be that we are on our way. One of my theories is that our brains are made up of several modules, each of which is something like an LLM trained on a particular type of data, but I'm not a neuroscientist, just an interested observer.
vhantz · · focus · HN ↗
vhantz · · focus · HN ↗
daishi55 · · focus · HN ↗
Because I would be more than happy to go head to head with you on academic and professional pedigree and credentials.
I notice you also ignore my comment that you seem to be replying to and instead post your response here. But did you have any answer to the question I asked?
<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49776482">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49776482
vhantz · · focus · HN ↗
daishi55 · · focus · HN ↗
You’re hiding behind implications because your actual argument doesn’t withstand the slightest scrutiny.
You have yet to respond to either of the points I made. Zero intellectual conviction or courage!
rpdillon · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49315846">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49315846
I don't think you're gonna get much out of going back and forth here.
For what it's worth, I disagree with you that they're intelligent, but my conviction is fairly low. I don't understand intelligence as well as I would like, and it could well be that we are on our way. One of my theories is that our brains are made up of several modules, each of which is something like an LLM trained on a particular type of data, but I'm not a neuroscientist, just an interested observer.
daishi55 · · focus · HN ↗
And of course there is a lot of ambiguity and unknown here. But this guy I don’t think has the capacity to deal with that kind of subtlety.