We know how LLMs learn at the fundamental level. What we do not know is the actual dynamic process of encoding embeddings and their distributions.
Your analogies about the PC and web browser are not correctly formulated, because in the case of the PC you talk about 'external components' (you should be talking about cpu arch, structure, digital components, interfaces, etc); in the case of the web browser, you should be talking about modules, code, etc.
We do know how LLMs are laid out: layers, att heads, etc. So what we need to look at are the fundamental possibilities of the structure of LLMs, not how the weights are distributed.
> > And we also know that human beings do not hold 'internal representations' like any AI system needs to.
> Bold fucking claim. Got a source on that?
Part of the sources are in the books I mentioned. Nonetheless, you can still fact-check and refute in an adult and serious manner, not in an disrespectful and arrogant way. If my claim sounded arrogant I apologize, but then as I already mentioned, my references back that claim.
Regarding internal representations in the brain: I guess you are referring to areas of the brain being activated when a subject receives a stimuli, and this is tested through MRI. I would be cautious to causally relate stimuli to neuron activations, since you first need to know if the exact configuration of cell involved and their connections allow for such representation (which I think it is still not known -- again, AFAIK, the contrary seems to be the case).
Your analogies about the PC and web browser are not correctly formulated, because in the case of the PC you talk about 'external components' (you should be talking about cpu arch, structure, digital components, interfaces, etc); in the case of the web browser, you should be talking about modules, code, etc.
We do know how LLMs are laid out: layers, att heads, etc. So what we need to look at are the fundamental possibilities of the structure of LLMs, not how the weights are distributed.
> > And we also know that human beings do not hold 'internal representations' like any AI system needs to.
> Bold fucking claim. Got a source on that?
Part of the sources are in the books I mentioned. Nonetheless, you can still fact-check and refute in an adult and serious manner, not in an disrespectful and arrogant way. If my claim sounded arrogant I apologize, but then as I already mentioned, my references back that claim.
Regarding internal representations in the brain: I guess you are referring to areas of the brain being activated when a subject receives a stimuli, and this is tested through MRI. I would be cautious to causally relate stimuli to neuron activations, since you first need to know if the exact configuration of cell involved and their connections allow for such representation (which I think it is still not known -- again, AFAIK, the contrary seems to be the case).