>“It’s a glorified word predictor” is becoming increasingly maddening to read.
Do tell— how can you prove humans are any different?
One difference between humans and LLMs is that humans have a wide range of inputs and outputs beyond language. The claim that humans are word predictors is not something I would want to dispute.
The claim that humans are nothing more than word predictors is obviously wrong though. When I go to buy food, it's not because I'm predicting the words "I'm hungry". It's because I'm predicting that I'll be hungry.
For me, the most interesting question is whether the way in which language is related to our perception of the physical and social world as well as our perception of ourselves in this world is a precondition for fully understanding the meaning of language.
One difference between humans and LLMs is that humans have a wide range of inputs and outputs beyond language. The claim that humans are word predictors is not something I would want to dispute.
The claim that humans are nothing more than word predictors is obviously wrong though. When I go to buy food, it's not because I'm predicting the words "I'm hungry". It's because I'm predicting that I'll be hungry.
For me, the most interesting question is whether the way in which language is related to our perception of the physical and social world as well as our perception of ourselves in this world is a precondition for fully understanding the meaning of language.