3 ms·

I don't know how that connects in any way to what I and the commenter preceding me wrote.

• stavros 3y ago
  You said that sentences aren't formed by probability from an existing corpus, as that method can't count backwards. GPT-4, a system based on such a method, can count backwards, thus disproving your claim.
  • woodruffw 3y ago
    I’m pretty sure the person you’re responding to is saying that counting is a formal operation with a formal definition, and that when GPT “counts” it isn’t doing that formal operation. The fact that it can semi-reliably emit ordered sequences isn’t counterevidence, for the same reason that memorizing the order of 0 to 100 isn’t evidence of an understanding of the inductive structure of counting.
    • jacquesm 3y ago
      How long a sequence of numbers (or how many sequences of different kinds of numbers) would it take to convince someone that it does do a formal operation? Kids don't do a 'formal operation' when they count from 1 to 10, they just recite a list they've memorized. If they can do it from 1 to 1,000,000 you can be fairly sure it is no longer a memorized list.
  • 15457345234 3y ago
    > thus disproving your claim Is there an alternative conclusion which you could reach here?