3 ms·

> While I do tend to believe you, what evidence based data do you have to prove this is true? IMO the onus is to prove that they can be strategic. Otherwise yo

by gtowey 8mo ago

> While I do tend to believe you, what evidence based data do you have to prove this is true? IMO the onus is to prove that they can be strategic. Otherwise you're asking me to prove a negative.

pixl97 8mo ago
Saying the tiger has to prove it can eat you is not a great strategy to survive a tiger attack.
- bigstrat2003 8mo ago
  Well so far the tiger faceplants in an embarrassing fashion every time it tries to eat someone. So I'm not really worried about that.
  - pixl97 8mo ago
    Gary Marcus: "LLMs will never be able to a..... wait, what do you mean they can already do that?"
vonneumannstan 8mo ago
Task Time horizons are improving exponentially with doubling times around 4 months per METR. At what timescale would you accept that they "can be strategic"? Theres little reason to think they wont be at multi week or month time horizons very soon. Do you need to be strategic to complete multi month tasks?
- gtowey 8mo ago
  Can an LLM give you an upfront estimate that a task will take multiple months? Can it decide intelligently what it would have to change if you said "do what you can to have it ready in half the time?"
  - vonneumannstan 8mo ago
    >Can an LLM give you an upfront estimate that a task will take multiple months? >Can it decide intelligently what it would have to change if you said "do what you can to have it ready in half the time?" Do you think ChatGPT 5.2 Pro can't estimate how long a task might take? Do you think that estimate would necessarily be worse than the estimates, which are notoriously poor, coming from human engineers? But you can still answer my question. When an LLM can complete a task that takes a person N months or years, is it capable of being strategic?
    - manxiemanx 7mo ago
      Multiple people have already answered your question in this thread. An LLM can’t be strategic because that’s not a capability of the technology itself

by gtowey 8mo ago

> While I do tend to believe you, what evidence based data do you have to prove this is true? IMO the onus is to prove that they can be strategic. Otherwise you're asking me to prove a negative.

pixl97 8mo ago

Saying the tiger has to prove it can eat you is not a great strategy to survive a tiger attack.

bigstrat2003 8mo ago
Well so far the tiger faceplants in an embarrassing fashion every time it tries to eat someone. So I'm not really worried about that.
- pixl97 8mo ago
  Gary Marcus: "LLMs will never be able to a..... wait, what do you mean they can already do that?"

vonneumannstan 8mo ago

Task Time horizons are improving exponentially with doubling times around 4 months per METR. At what timescale would you accept that they "can be strategic"? Theres little reason to think they wont be at multi week or month time horizons very soon. Do you need to be strategic to complete multi month tasks?

gtowey 8mo ago
Can an LLM give you an upfront estimate that a task will take multiple months? Can it decide intelligently what it would have to change if you said "do what you can to have it ready in half the time?"
- vonneumannstan 8mo ago
  >Can an LLM give you an upfront estimate that a task will take multiple months? >Can it decide intelligently what it would have to change if you said "do what you can to have it ready in half the time?" Do you think ChatGPT 5.2 Pro can't estimate how long a task might take? Do you think that estimate would necessarily be worse than the estimates, which are notoriously poor, coming from human engineers? But you can still answer my question. When an LLM can complete a task that takes a person N months or years, is it capable of being strategic?
  - manxiemanx 7mo ago
    Multiple people have already answered your question in this thread. An LLM can’t be strategic because that’s not a capability of the technology itself