Yes I very much understand that most people do not think that LLMs think or understand like we do, but it is _very difficult_ to prove that that is the case, using any test which does not also exclude a great deal of people. And that is because "thinking like we do" is not at all a well-defined concept.

> exclude a great deal of people

And why should you not exclude them. Where does this idea come from, taking random elements as models. Where do you see pedestals of free access? Is the Nobel Prize a raffle now?