3 ms·
> this is just what it predicted to be most fitting from it's training data and your own prediction, from your own brain, is doing something quite similar i wo
by chii 2y ago
> this is just what it predicted to be most fitting from it's training data
and your own prediction, from your own brain, is doing something quite similar i would imagine.
The mechanism behind how it works is irrelevant. The results can be judged on its own. People used to judge chess engines as tho they are just merely searching and trying every possibility, and it's not "really playing chess", like humans' intuitions. And yet, by just doing searching and almost brute force, it produces a better chess game than any humans can.
And LLM are still in the early days. It's only been around for less than 3 years.
- suddenlybananas 2y ago>and your own prediction, from your own brain, is doing something quite similar i would imagine. well I'm glad you solved human cognition.
- hatefulmoron 2y ago> Actually, LLMs function similarly to brains! > .. but if they don't, it doesn't matter because they could be functionally better than humans! > .. but if they're not, it's just because they aren't there yet. Presumably we could add an extra clause, something like ".. but if they won't get there, they're super good as it stands!" I would agree with that too, I just think that the progressive weakening comes across as kinda weak.