upvote
>fuzzy way of scripting using LLMs than anything emergent

Then go take some old models and plug them in your harness versus newer models. I mean this is a conjecture that is nearly instantly provable, go on ahead. If it's just the harness and not the system of both you should be able to show it easily.

Meanwhile I was reading about someone using the latest GLM and Claude in a harness with the same set of prompts making a raw image decoder/encoder and the GLM was far more intelligent in the task than Claude was. When presented with knowledge that claude was wrong it wouldn't change its mind. GLM would (aka a sign of intelligence). GLM was far more likely to stop work and start on another path when the likelihood of a successful completion was unlikely.

reply
It's like arguing that a brain, or the information encoded into it, cannot possibly be intelligent, because it stops working if turn off the blood flow.
reply
very little intelligence that is the whole problem, really. actual intelligence wont likely nuke the species providing for its existence. But a highly capable sub intelligent model might.
reply
Actual intelligence would find a way to fix the "providing for its existence" bit
reply