|
| ▲ | barnacs 4 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| > Thinking is using what you know to come to a logical conclusion What LLMs do is using what they have _seen_ to come to a _statistical_ conclusion. Just like a complex statistical weather forecasting model. I have never heard anyone argue that such models would "know" about weather phenomena and reason about the implications to come to a "logical" conclusion. |
| |
| ▲ | chpatrick 4 days ago | parent [-] | | I think people misunderstand when they see that it's a "statistical model". That just means that out of a range of possible answers, it picks in a humanlike way. If the logical answer is the humanlike thing to say then it will be more likely to sample it. In the same way a human might produce a range of answers to the same question, so humans are also drawing from a theoretical statistical distribution when you talk to them. It's just a mathematical way to describe an agent, whether it's an LLM or human. |
|
|
| ▲ | bluefirebrand 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I dunno man if you can't see how creativity and thinking are inextricably linked I don't know what to tell you LLMs aren't good at either, imo. They are rote regurgitation machines, or at best they mildly remix the data they have in a way that might be useful They don't actually have any intelligence or skills to be creative or logical though |
| |
| ▲ | chpatrick 4 days ago | parent [-] | | They're linked but they're very different. Speaking from personal experience, It's a whole different task to solve an engineering problem that's been assigned to you where you need to break it down and reason your way to a solution, vs. coming up with something brand new like a song or a piece of art where there's no guidance. It's just a very different use of your brain. |
|
