3 ms·
> Things like this show that LLM are not even remotely intelligent. Sorry for the bluntness, but no it does not show that. Or at least, you could use the same
by LordDragonfang 3y ago
> Things like this show that LLM are not even remotely intelligent.
Sorry for the bluntness, but no it does not show that. Or at least, you could use the same reasoning to claim that most humans are not "remotely intelligent".
What you're seeing is the rote regurgitation of someone who's been taught how to answer a question without ever learning how to think about the why.
This failure mode that's extremely common to see when tutoring (humans, that is). You'll have students who will quickly give a wrong guess that was clearly just chosen from a list of previous answers they've encountered before in class. When asked to explain why they chose that answer, they can only shrug. The main difference between them and e.g. GPT4 is that the latter is far more eloquent and better at stringing justifications together, which we associate with more reasoning capability so it throws off our evaluation of its overall intelligence.
Because LLMs are fundamentally a type of alien intelligence, different from the types we're used to.
- WalterBright 3y ago> What you're seeing is the rote regurgitation Exactly. And that's not intelligence.
- LordDragonfang 3y agoRight, but my point is that while regurgitation is not intelligence, the act of doing so is not enough to claim the regurgitator itself is not intelligent. Otherwise, you'd condemn a good half of humanity with the same reasoning. Or more, if we're willing to consider most peoples' reactions to at least some political topics - they just ignore the context and repeat the dogma they've learned (some more than others). People rarely stop and think for everything. The problem here is that the LLM has learned that everything is political, and can be responded to the same way.