> Boldly asserting that what LLMS do is not cognition is even worse than asserting that it is. That's the issue I was driving at. The machine is so convincing.

> Boldly asserting that what LLMS do is not cognition is even worse than asserting that it is. That's the issue I was driving at. The machine is so convincing. How can we say what it does is not "thinking" when it seems to be breaking down a query like a human does. The distinction between what an AI is and what an LLM is - is so thin that most of us will be ignorant and combine the two because you really need to see what is under the hood before you understand that the responses you're getting are from a "model" - not some sentient thinking machine. But what does it matter if it is from a "model" that understands text? It still produces more or less what other humans produce. Most of us won't care about the difference.