>Can such macro structures model intelligence in theory? Yes. So you agree it's possible. >Yes. But as we see in practice they aren't very logical. For exampl

>Can such macro structures model intelligence in theory? Yes. So you agree it's possible. >Yes. But as we see in practice they aren't very logical. For example in this article we see that its markov chain didn't have enough programming language descriptions, Well as humans we have many separate models for all different components an aspects of the world around us. Clearly LLMs form many models that in practice are not accurate. But that does not mean all the models are defective. The fact that it can write blog posts indicates that many of these models are remarkably accurate and that it understands the concept of a "blog post". There is literal evidence of chatGPT answering questions as if it has an accurate underlying model of "understanding" as well as actual identified structures within the nerual net itself. There is also evidence for your point of chatGPT clearly forming broken and inaccurate models by answering questions with wrong answers that don't make sense. What gets me is that even when there is Clear and abundant evidence for both cases some people have to make the claim that chatGPT doesn't understand anything. The accurate answer is that LLMs understand some things and it doesn't understand other things.