It isn't surprising to the least, and given how little humanity knows about quasi-human level intelligence, I would suggest taking any hard claims about limitat

It isn't surprising to the least, and given how little humanity knows about quasi-human level intelligence, I would suggest taking any hard claims about limitations of LLMs with a grain of salt. > Progress is increasingly driven by trying things and seeing what works rather than a theory-first approach, and whenever this occurs, a lot of mysticism tends to accompany the process. This sounds wrong. It sounds as if you're arguing that empiricism and the usual scientific method ends up in mysticism. If it does, maybe the things we're creating should command that respect from us, as much as all other natural phenomena that we don't understand. The traditional idea that many CS experts popularized that computers are just applied maths and you could infer anything on a computer with pure thought is wrong IMHO.