3 ms·

I don't think this sort of dismissal adds anything to the conversation. I myself, in the act of typing this comment, am "generating text". I think it's interes

I don't think this sort of dismissal adds anything to the conversation. I myself, in the act of typing this comment, am "generating text". I think it's interesting to discuss the capabilities of leading-edge language models like GPT-4, because (a) they are already exhibiting the ability to perform a wide variety of useful tasks, and (b) it's clear that there is still a lot of unrealized potential here. Can you clarify the implications you see here? Are you saying that these LLMs are somehow uninteresting or incapable? That there are limits to what they will be able to accomplish even with further improvements? Or something else?

ttpphd 4y ago
I am not making a comment about the usefulness of LLMs to manipulate text. If anything, my view is that to the extent that LLMs are seen as intelligent it's precisely because they manipulate text in ways humans find useful, not because it follows from some philosophy about intelligence or rationality. Maybe I'm being too opinionated but I think we should stop dressing up explanations of large language models in misleading terminology. I'd prefer instead to talk about the actual technology and reason from there.