53 points

LLMs don’t understand any words.

permalink
report
reply
17 points

yes. and you wouldn’t believe¹ what’s in the replies when you make this simple and obvious statement.

¹ who i am kidding. of course you know.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I both agree and disagree. I think of them as golems. They do understand how to respond, but that’s as deep as it goes. It’s simulated understanding, but a very very good simulation… Okay maybe I do agree.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

I think that at best you could say that they understand the relationship between tokens. But even that requires a really generous definition of the word “understand”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

There’s a saying…“Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in fruit salad.”

Meanwhile, LLMs are telling us to put glue on pizza so the cheese sticks. Even if the technology could eventually deliver on the promise, by the time we get there, nobody intelligent will trust it because the tech bros are, again, throwing half-baked garbage out into the world to try and be first to market.

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

it’s almost like this thing has no internal conceptual representation! I know this can’t possibly be, millions of promptfans and prompfondlers have told me it can’t be so, but it sure does look that way! wild!

permalink
report
reply
-4 points

It must have some internal models of some things, or else it wouldn’t be possible to consistently make coherent and mostly reasonable statements. But the fact that it has a reasonable model of things like grammar and conversation doesn’t imply that it has a good model of literally anything else, which is unlike a human for whom a basic set of cognitive skills is presumably transferable. Still, the success of LLMs in their actual language-modeling objective is a promising indication that it’s feasible for a ML model to learn complex abstractions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

if I copy a coherent sentence into my clipboard, my clipboard becomes capable of consistently making coherent statements

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points
*

Yes, but that’s not how LLMs work. My statement depends heavily on the fact that a LLM like GPT is coaxed into coherence by unsupervised or semi-supervised training. That the training process works is the evidence of an internal model (of language/related concepts), not just the fact that something outputs coherent statements.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

it doesn’t. that’s why we’re calling it “spicy autocompletion” .

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

It does, which is why it’s autocompletion and not auto-gibberish.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

It must have some internal models of some things, or else it wouldn’t be possible to consistently make coherent and mostly reasonable statements.

Talk about begging the question

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

Ha, I love the sauce on that headline.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

It’s not the headline used by the publication.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

yes, this is the anti-HN

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

it seems like it’s not the worst way to write text if I don’t want to allow an ai to parse my messages…

permalink
report
reply
13 points

not being not sure to fail to not write like this could become the opposite of interesting after a time that isn’t long, though

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Wow… It’s not easy trying not to misunderstand sentences…

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply

TechTakes

!techtakes@awful.systems

Create post

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here’s the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

Community stats

  • 2.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 512

    Posts

  • 14K

    Comments

Community moderators