zxcvzcvx wrote:
The program 'learns' with a great deal of data. That data is essentially written in to it, like a different form of book in which it stays there and can be searched for very quickly. 'It' does not know that information. It looks it up. Humans store bio-chemical memory in their brains. That is what they 'know'. They also have to remember stuff that is not as present to them. Then they think of how to figure things out and adapt to new things. That's the part we think of as intelligence. We also access written information. So, to compete we would need open book and computer search as well. Then it would be comparable. I bet most LSAT takers beat AI on this type of test--granting, however, that their speed would be much worse.
When you learn something, how different is it 'stored' than a computer writing bits into memory?
Look, I get that there's difference but these LLMs clearly have an emergent form of reasoning on top of simple recall. You can say 'that's just because they've seen tons of data in training!' -- OK aren't you intelligent because you saw a lot of data in training as well?
The LLMs solve difficult exams that require reasoning - it's not just rote recitation.
