2 ms·

One of the reasons I think LLMs are somehow analogous to brains is that they scale based on size. This seems true for animal brains as well. But you seem to be

One of the reasons I think LLMs are somehow analogous to brains is that they scale based on size. This seems true for animal brains as well. But you seem to be suggesting that all animal brains are equally powerful, because they have infinite neuron states, quantum superpositioned neurons, etc. As far as I can tell, you seem to be suggesting that my old cat’s brain has the same complexity as my brain - right? So, I’m interested in understanding why my cat is demonstrably stupider than I am, despite having infinite complexity, and why whatevrr you come up with doesn’t also apply to LLM size.

hooloovoo_zoo 4y ago
No, I’m saying having a finite number of neurons doesn’t imply a particular number of brain states. Scaling laws actually don’t apply very strictly to brain size. For example, whales have very large brains but aren’t generally thought to be more capable of reasoning than humans. Women generally have smaller brains than men but aren’t thought to be less capable of reasoning.
- SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
  > No, I’m saying having a finite number of neurons doesn’t imply a particular number of brain states. But of course it does imply that. It's vast but necessarily finite number of "brain states" however that's defined, which is itself a subset of the vast but also finite number of states of the finite number of component particles.