Today's Large Language Models are Essentially BS Machines

Veraticus@lib.lgbt to Technology@beehaw.org – 151 points –
quandyfactory.com
124

You are viewing a single comment

I’m giving up here but evolution did not “design” us. LLMs are designs and created with a purpose in mind and they fulfill that purpose. Humans were not designed.

In cybernetics that's irrelevant as the purpose of a system is what it does. I can design an algorithm that plays pong, I can write a program to evolve one, they might actually end up being identical and noone could tell.

It's entirely not irrelevant. Even if you create a program to evolve pong, that was also designed by a human. As a computer programmer you should know that no computer program will just become pong, what an idiotic idea.

You just keep pivoting away from how you were using words to them meaning something entirely different; this entire argument is worthless. At least LLMs don't change the definitions of the words they use as they use them.

Playing pong. Inputs: ball (and possibly enemy) position, output: paddle left or right. Something like NEAT will very quickly come up with the obvious "track the ball" approach using just as many AST nodes as you would.