No this is categorically wrong. There is science showing that LLMs build actual models around the subject it is learning. It is akin to someone looking over th

No this is categorically wrong. There is science showing that LLMs build actual models around the subject it is learning. It is akin to someone looking over the shoulder at your math homework and deriving understanding just from that. This isn't a mistake. This is what the current science says. What makes me curious is that chatGPT even has output that displays complete understanding and is so novel it is impossible for the output to be anything else other then actual understanding. Yet people are still running around downplaying it all. The proof is right there. You can interact with chatGPT. The science is also there. Yet people just want to downplay it. Perhaps it's fear of the future and what it means for humanity?