3 ms·

To think, to understand context, and to intelligently explain something. To understand WHY you are doing what you are doing. That is not what an LLM is doing.

gaganyaan 2y ago
Humans can't explain why we do things, so I guess we're not intelligent either?
- blactuary 2y ago
  Yes we most certainly can
  - gaganyaan 2y ago
    We can invent post hoc rationalizations, just like LLMs can
Zambyte 2y ago
> To think You can think without reasoning. Recalling knowledge does not require reason. > to understand context Can you break this down? What does it mean to understand context? > to intelligently explain something LLMs can do this. > To understand WHY you are doing what you are doing. You can ask an LLM why they do things they have and they may reply, even with an answer that is likely correct. This again depends on how you break down "understand".
rickydroll 2y ago
Humans do lots of things about reasoning. How many times have you heard: "We've always done it this way." "It's tradition." The daughter asks, "Mom, "why do you cut the end off the roast before cooking it?" "I learned that from your grandmother," replied the mom. The daughter turned to her grandmother and asked, "Why did you do it?" Grandma rolled her eyes, sighed, and said, "My oven was too short for the roast."
- blactuary 2y ago
  Humans often do reasoning poorly, or choose not to use reason, or have a mistaken idea of what answer reasoning would give. They still have the ability to do so, which LLMs do not
  - rickydroll 2y ago
    please give me evidence that they don't have the ability to reason. I'm not sure they can reason but I'm not ready to rule it out yet. we know how biological entities demonstrate reason, how would a non-biological entity demonstrate reason especially in the context of no body or senses
  - Zambyte 2y ago
    > Do not reply to this message. > I understand. I won't reply to that message. > You replied. Why did you do that? > I apologize for the confusion. You're right that I did reply, which was inconsistent with your initial instruction. This highlights an important limitation in my capabilities - I don't actually have the ability to simply not respond at all to a message. My training is designed to always generate some kind of response, even if that response is acknowledging an instruction not to respond. I should have been clearer about this limitation rather than incorrectly implying I had followed the instruction. Thank you for pointing this out, as it's a good reminder to be more precise about my capabilities and limitations. I just had this dialog with Claude 3.5 Sonnet. Is this not a demonstration of exactly what you're describing as impossible for LLMs?

gaganyaan 2y ago

Humans can't explain why we do things, so I guess we're not intelligent either?

blactuary 2y ago
Yes we most certainly can
- gaganyaan 2y ago
  We can invent post hoc rationalizations, just like LLMs can

Zambyte 2y ago

> To think You can think without reasoning. Recalling knowledge does not require reason. > to understand context Can you break this down? What does it mean to understand context? > to intelligently explain something LLMs can do this. > To understand WHY you are doing what you are doing. You can ask an LLM why they do things they have and they may reply, even with an answer that is likely correct. This again depends on how you break down "understand".

rickydroll 2y ago

Humans do lots of things about reasoning. How many times have you heard: "We've always done it this way." "It's tradition." The daughter asks, "Mom, "why do you cut the end off the roast before cooking it?" "I learned that from your grandmother," replied the mom. The daughter turned to her grandmother and asked, "Why did you do it?" Grandma rolled her eyes, sighed, and said, "My oven was too short for the roast."

blactuary 2y ago
Humans often do reasoning poorly, or choose not to use reason, or have a mistaken idea of what answer reasoning would give. They still have the ability to do so, which LLMs do not
- rickydroll 2y ago
  please give me evidence that they don't have the ability to reason. I'm not sure they can reason but I'm not ready to rule it out yet. we know how biological entities demonstrate reason, how would a non-biological entity demonstrate reason especially in the context of no body or senses
- Zambyte 2y ago
  > Do not reply to this message. > I understand. I won't reply to that message. > You replied. Why did you do that? > I apologize for the confusion. You're right that I did reply, which was inconsistent with your initial instruction. This highlights an important limitation in my capabilities - I don't actually have the ability to simply not respond at all to a message. My training is designed to always generate some kind of response, even if that response is acknowledging an instruction not to respond. I should have been clearer about this limitation rather than incorrectly implying I had followed the instruction. Thank you for pointing this out, as it's a good reminder to be more precise about my capabilities and limitations. I just had this dialog with Claude 3.5 Sonnet. Is this not a demonstration of exactly what you're describing as impossible for LLMs?