Not sure why everyone rates this. It’s full of very confidently made statements like “the AI has no ground truth” (obviously it does, it has ingested every paper ever), it “can’t reason logically” which seems like a stretch if you ever read the CoT of a frontier reasoning model and “can’t explain how they arrived at conclusions” where - I mean just try it yourself with o1, go as deep as you like asking how it arrived at a conclusion and see if a human can do any better.
In fact the most annoying thing about this article is that it is a string of very confidently made, black and white statements, offered with no supporting evidence, and some of which I think are actually wrong… i.e. it suffers from the same kind of unsubstantiated self confidence that we complain about with the weaker models
In fact the most annoying thing about this article is that it is a string of very confidently made, black and white statements, offered with no supporting evidence, and some of which I think are actually wrong… i.e. it suffers from the same kind of unsubstantiated self confidence that we complain about with the weaker models