3 ms·
Do you not say your words one-at-a-time like everyone else? Otherwise I can’t see how my comment is “wrong”
by semiquaver 4mo ago
Do you not say your words one-at-a-time like everyone else? Otherwise I can’t see how my comment is “wrong”
- tuvix 4mo agoEven if you could understand human cognition to the level required to say, confidently, that it’s done one word at a time, it’s likely not! Natural language is not a prerequisite for human intelligence, as evidenced by the fact that we went from primates to commenting on HN. Natural language is, however, a prerequisite for the existence of LLMs. It’s more similar to methods for storing and retrieving information, like the printing press or a database, than it is to a sentient being. That’s not to say that LLMs can’t do crazy things, because they already have. Our language can encode a whole lot of information, and it’s incredible that we’ve found a way to distill that so effectively.
- skeptic_ai 4mo agoDeepseek zero didn’t mix up all languages in something very efficient?
- tuvix 4mo agoInteresting thought but I assume a lot of samples in the training corpus are examples of translation between languages and the same text in different languages.
- iainmerrick 4mo agoEven if you could understand human cognition to the level required to say, confidently, that it’s done one word at a time, it’s likely not! I think they’re not talking about cognition, but about output: regardless of what may be happening inside your brain, ultimately one word at a time comes out of your mouth, right? And you can’t then unsay it. When you put it in those terms, LLMs are in exactly the same boat.
- artisin 4mo agoOnly one word at a time!?! It's time you embrace the way of the diffusion model and hazily refine your entire thought until it's coherent.
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- root_axis 4mo ago> Do you not say your words one-at-a-time like everyone else You're conflating being autoregressive with being sequential.