I feel like this ignores how LLMs work. 1) of course not they would be fed information, but as we build multi modal models that can achieve more and more world

I feel like this ignores how LLMs work. 1) of course not they would be fed information, but as we build multi modal models that can achieve more and more world integration there’s no reason why not. 2) They’re very adaptive, by their abductive nature they adapt extraordinarily well to new situations. Perhaps too much - hence the challenge with hallucinations. 3) this isn’t necessarily true, as can be seen by some of the modern alignment in SOTA models being more and more difficult to evade. When prompted and aligned with drug seeking behavior training why would you assume they’re bad at detecting this? 4) again I don’t see why this is true. A general purpose LLM might be, but one that’s been aligned properly should do fine. 5) why do you think LLMs are not adaptive? They adapt through reinforcement and alignment. As a larger corpus of interactions are available they adapt and align towards the training goals. There is extensive research and experience in alignment to date, and models are often continuously adapted. You don’t need to retrain the entire base model you can just retrain a LoRA or embeddings. You can even adapt to specific situations by dynamically pulling in a LoRA or embeddings set for situations. 6) They have human like responses to human situations because they’re trained on a corpus of human language. For a highly specialized model you can ensure specific types of human experience and behavior are well represented and reinforced. You can align the behavior to be what you need. All this said I don’t think anyone in this is proposing to take humans entirely out of the loop. But there are many situations where ML models or even heuristics out perform human experts in their own field. There’s no reason to believe LLMs, especially when augmented with diagnostic expert system agents, couldn’t generally out perform a doctor in diagnosis. This doesn’t mean the human doctor is irrelevant but that their skills are enhanced and patient outcomes improve with them help of such systems. Regardless though I feel these criticisms of the approach reflect a naïveté about the ways these models work and what they’re capable of.