> The trouble is people think it goes deeper when the knowledge modeling part only happens incidentally because language and knowledge modeling are so closely r

> The trouble is people think it goes deeper when the knowledge modeling part only happens incidentally because language and knowledge modeling are so closely related. I think there's a strong argument to be made (that has been made) that much of our knowledge capability is built on language - that language did not simply allow us to communicate our knowledge, but actually allowed individuals to think in a new way. I certainly agree that current LLMs have no regard for truth and logic at their core, and there are clearly areas where their ability to read and write does not translate to producing true statements. LLMs can't build things out of language like humans can. I am less sure that LLMs don't have a long way to go before we reach the limits of what modeling language can do.