Late reply to this -https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38233029 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38233029 But yeah we agree that GPT isn't necessarily do

Late reply to this -https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38233029 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38233029 But yeah we agree that GPT isn't necessarily doing things like how a human does and that it doesn't necessarily understand things as well as a human. I guess I just primarily took issue on the use of "Understanding". Understanding is a spectrum, not binary. In school, in the workplace or whatever, there's a big range of performance and capability even in the range we confess understanding to. We say that both the C and A student(and everyone in-between) have understanding of the material, at least enough to be useful for that domain. So what can I say, I use the same standard with the machines. It understands chess now, even if not perfectly.