> I disagree with your confident assertions about its "agency" and "intent" when there's no goal post for what those things mean in humans to begin with. I'm n

> I disagree with your confident assertions about its "agency" and "intent" when there's no goal post for what those things mean in humans to begin with. I'm not sure how confident I am! I think the success of LLMs are serving to challenge our understandings of cognition and intelligence in humans. I tend to agree with you that our understanding of agency, intent, intelligence, cognition, free will, and related ideas in humans is incomplete and so it is a challenge to think about how they might apply (or not) to LLMs. > whats the difference between faking it and actually having agency? Good question. The Chinese Room Argument is very close to this but framed as "understanding" vs "agency": https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/