> The point is that it's the same process

Except it’s not at all the same process. The fact that LLM are non deterministic is not the same as churning out random garbage.

▲

tsunamifury 3 days ago | parent [-]

The literally churn out random garbage and are trained over time for that garbage to look more and more like an acceptable outcome to humans.

It’s training monkeys at typewriters through reinforcement.

▲

dpark 3 days ago | parent [-]

> trained over time

So not random.

> acceptable outcome to humans

And not garbage.

It’s real weird to see people argue that LLM output is no different than random gibberish and then handwave over the fact that it’s clearly not with terms like “training”, as if a steam of random garbage is trainable.

▲

tsunamifury 2 days ago | parent [-]

Hey dpark.

I quite literally created and productized predictive linguistics and behavioral vectors at Google.

If you had stopped to consider what I explained; you’d understand that it’s the process of turning random garbage into increasingly acceptable outputs.

Ie training the monkeys.

The insight you are missing is the rule of networked scale. It turns out that any reactive node scaled enough can form sophisticated predictive system given reward over a training topography, even if it starts out at garbage or is literally made of monkeys.

So it is garbage. And you can turn garbage into semi-intelligence.

▲

dpark 2 days ago | parent [-]

A human child is born with no ability to speak intelligibly. All they can do is babble. Through years of training they gain the ability to speak intelligibly and communicate in advanced ways.

The act of successful training means it’s not garbage anymore.

> So it is garbage.

This statement is ultimately meaningless and I continue to find it weird that someone who works in this space would support this view. If you fundamentally change the nature of a thing, it’s no longer that original thing. Is tan HDD still random garbage after you fill it with family photos just because that’s how it starts?

▲

tsunamifury 2 days ago | parent [-]

Because you can do it with anything. Literally any reactive node physical or virtual can do it given scale or complexity.

You can start with garbage.

This is not human. Humans are billions of years in passed DNA learning. Babies are born to a sophistication level millions of times higher than this.

I’m pretty surprised you don’t know this.

▲

dpark 2 days ago | parent [-]

If you start with a fire hose of literal sewage and install a series of filters culminating in a reverse osmosis step that pours clean drinking water out, the product is not shit even if the original input was.

I don’t believe that you can’t understand the distinction between “at one point this was garbage” and “at the present time this is still garbage”. You’re clearly smarter than that.

	▲	tsunamifury 20 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I’m saying the distinction doesn’t matter. This is what NNs proved. All matter can become semi intelligent.