Trained on a very small portion of what has been written, heavily biased by what is available to American companies to acquire. You could argue that LLMs are somewhat representative of their training data (with some consideration to the way that they are trained) but to say it’s anything like a representation of what humans think is nonsense.

It is a simulacrum, the end.

There's nothing small about it, and I didn't say it's a representation of what humans think. I said it's the models take on humanity based on having been trained on a far larger amount of text than any human has ever read