Do you think your brain doesn't do a type of gradient descent, trying to fit its little predictive algorithms to its senses? Do you think you aren't a fancy probability machine with overinflated self-esteem?

An average LLM of today has better reading comprehension than an average human, and the gap only grows release to release.

"Understand the human mind" turned out to be a distractor. The bitter lesson won: you can take a "good enough" AI architecture, burn a shitton of data into it with an unholy amount of training compute, and get halfway to AGI - no "understand the brain" required. LLMs are so fried in imitation learning on human-generated data they even inherit humanlike failure modes.

I mean I can write a non-llm program that "has better reading comprehension than an average human" depending on what you think reading comprehension means. Today I went to ask an LLM some very simple questions, stuff you can google and "do these lines have X word in it" and it failed to answer pretty spectacularly several times in a row, so I'm just not feeling the LLMs are superior intellgence today.