> 2. Transformers aren't "computers" in the turing machine sense given their finite state That's true, but then the things we normally think of today as "compu

> 2. Transformers aren't "computers" in the turing machine sense given their finite state That's true, but then the things we normally think of today as "computers" also aren't, because of their finite amount of memory. I think that the author is implying that, like linearization, we can approximate transformers as being Turing-complete for a small range of operation (that's much larger for "real" computers).