2 ms·
> fundamentally lacks We don't actually know that yet. It may very well fundamentally have all that is necessary for intelligence but other pieces are missing.
by stevenhuang 3y ago
> fundamentally lacks
We don't actually know that yet. It may very well fundamentally have all that is necessary for intelligence but other pieces are missing.
Frontier neuroscience and functional processes for how our brains work has more in common with the fundamentals of LLMs than not, vis-a-vis minimization of prediction errors.
- kaba0 3y agoI don’t think “fundamentally having something” is actually meaningful here - as it’s enough to show it is Turing complete for it to have fundamentally everything. Nonetheless, it’s probably not excel that will become the next AGI.