This is kind of reductionist. It's like saying that a human writing a book is just doing manual word completion starting from the title. It's technically correc

This is kind of reductionist. It's like saying that a human writing a book is just doing manual word completion starting from the title. It's technically correct, but what insight is contributed? Would anything about this conversation be different if someone trained a model that did diffusion-like inference in which every possible word in the answer is pushed towards the final result simultaneously? Probably not.