Ok, I've read the original paper. I agree with you fully on the claims made in the paper, and agree those claims are broadly substantiated by the paper. I com

Ok, I've read the original paper. I agree with you fully on the claims made in the paper, and agree those claims are broadly substantiated by the paper. I completely disagree that those claims are what is represented in the opening paragraphs of this article they have written, which directly analogizes to learning the grammatical rules of English and syntax of C++, which describes the model as understanding "the process producing the sequences". Demonstrating that the model processes the input sequence into a representative state, and that manipulating that state has a causal effect on the output, is a very different ball game than "our model understands the rules behind this sequence".