I think main tension here is that you think people confuse an LLM with a person having real world like experiences? I get that, and it's an interesting phenomen

I think main tension here is that you think people confuse an LLM with a person having real world like experiences? I get that, and it's an interesting phenomenon, it's just a helpful way to talk to these models. When I type in a query to ChatGPT, I know there's no real "you" in it, but it's just helpful for me to narrow down that Pllm probability space to give me a good enough answer I'm looking for. It's a helpful shortcut if I treat it like a person, but I should know it's a really good prediction machine which has access to most of the combined human knowledge in a latent space. I rarely go "wild", people rarely go "wild" with their train of thoughts and actions. Everybody is moving on a more or less predefined set of rails. How long that rail is and where it goes depends on the person and situation. Pyou is also limited in the sense that most of my outputs are history based, but all the sensory inputs I have gained over the years are now compressed into various neural circuits. I can act in surprising ways, but I'm more than a language model, although language is a huge part of me. I'm more like a Pyou(xyz, t, Pllm, I) where "I" is the magic soup of human experience encoded in some gray matter. You are right that most LLM-s are static, but we shouldn't ignore that complex systems (agents) can be built with LLM-s in which the language model is only an I/O layer to static knowledge. There could be other moving, dynamic parts which can be continuously updated and these parts can modify the behaviour of the system.