3 ms·
> I suspect what is much more likely meant, is that token predictors cannot be smart, not now nor in the future after improvements, because they are token predi
by Jensson 2mo ago
> I suspect what is much more likely meant, is that token predictors cannot be smart, not now nor in the future after improvements, because they are token predictors and predicting tokens is not how intelligence works.
Why do you think that? LLM are used as expert systems today, in order to quickly navigate problems by breaking them down and iterating between different well known possible solutions and paths to check etc. That is how they work, they do that by using their next token predictions, and for things they aren't well trained on they will produce dumb results.
LLM has solved enough problems that almost nobody has the view you ridicule here, but there are still many who think LLM are thinking just like humans and that you can trust them just like humans. So its important to remind people these are just token predictors and lack many things humans do.
> If ever there was a human quality.
Humans can avoid doing that by using introspection, LLM can't. That some humans do it by not using introspection doesn't mean humans are incapable of it, we know humans are capable of it, which is why we can point out when the LLM is wrong with certainty, humans as a group make extremely good predictions.
- vouwfietsman 2mo ago> Why do you think that? From (highly upvoted) parent: > LLMs are text-prediction engines. They are not Artificial Intelligence, and shouldn’t not be treated in any form or fashion as if they possess intelligence > LLM-based “AI” .... Hardly neutral statements, hardly accurate statements, yet highly upvoted. LLMs are AI, there is nothing to gain by pretending it isn't because of some secondary motive or opinion someone has. > LLM has solved enough problems that almost nobody has the view you ridicule here I think I have just shown you the parent literally claims LLMs are not AI, and do not possess intelligence. > but there are still many who think LLM are thinking just like humans and that you can trust them just like humans. I don't think many people think that, especially on HN, for two reasons: 1. Most high profile AI tools have immediately visible disclaimers saying, more or less, "AI makes mistakes". 2. People don't trust humans either, if anything people trust the AI more because it is not human. People may be incorrectly worshipping LLMs, but they are doing it precisely because it is not human. If you put chatgpt behind a believable chatbox so people would actually think it was human, they would be much more skeptical.