> 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

> 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.