When you use "next word predictor", it sounds like slow process, like each word take few seconds to minute to be generated. Why not call it "sentence predictor", or "paragraph predictor" ? i would argue it's the same in principle.
replyIt's like calling a video clip a "picture sequencer".
It’s equally useful to continually remind yourself that a Turing machine is just a spool of tape with a magnetic head, and that a human brain is just fatty lipids in a chemical bath.
replyWhat is the difference between reasoning and predicting what reasoning would look like?
replyThe same as the difference between a thing and a statistical model of a thing.
replyThey don't always match up.
In theory, theory and practice should be the same; in practice, they are not.
replyHuman reasoning also does not match up with reality. Isn't it statistical modeling all the way down?
replyThat statement demands an explanation.
replyAs far as I'm aware, when reasoning does not meet reality, it is called a delusion, and I'm fairly certain that majority of humans are not delusional.
I wish that were true, but in an election year, I'm constantly reminded that it isn't.
replyOne has a human behind it and one has a matrix latent space. Usually human understanding is more "real"
replyStallman vehemently states llms are bullshit generators with no true understanding.
But sometimes you can approximate your problem and unfold an llm interlocator to producing the strings you need for your task