The comic at the beginning paints the "stack more layers" LLM people as clowns, not neurosymbolic people or by proxy Chollet. Yes, it suggests the "stack more l

The comic at the beginning paints the "stack more layers" LLM people as clowns, not neurosymbolic people or by proxy Chollet. Yes, it suggests the "stack more layers" approach works anyway, but in a self-deprecating way... If this article wanted to attack Chollet, it could have made more hay out of another thing that's "hidden in the middle of the article", the note that the solution actually gets 72% on the subset of problems on which humans get ~85%. The fact that the claimed human baseline for ARC-AGI as a whole is based on an easy subset is pretty suspect.