> because it has to Nope. The space of all possible prompts and all possible answers, call it (Q, A) can be sampled with arbitrary precision by a system of ar

> because it has to Nope. The space of all possible prompts and all possible answers, call it (Q, A) can be sampled with arbitrary precision by a system of arbitrary size, using only statistical sampling and averaging. No intelligence need be developed. Intelligence is a capacity of animals to cope with the inability to sample from this space, in some sense: what to do when you do not know the answers. All these systems start with "training data", a euphemistic description of, "all the questions and their answers" and their job is to provide a compresson with engineering utility. Quite useful, sure. But rather irrelevant as far as, say, intelligence goes. What all AI does, and indeed what all such research shows, is that many problems we use intelligence to solve do not require it. There are a large number of short cuts, esp if you have the answers ahead-of-time. As soon as you specify intelligence as a function from single-domain inputs to single-domain outputs you can trivially build a system to implement that function in a "short cut" fashion. Intelligence, rather, is an empirical phenomenon to be studied as anything -- like the earth's climate say. You have a very large number of empirical measures (better or worse in different environments) that all derive from deeper explanatory theories. When you study animals this way you will see that you cannot reduce intelligence down to a set of prompt replies, and the veyr suggestion is absurd