> if we are to properly understand LLMs, we need to accept that linguistic creativity can be completely distinct from intelligence, and that text doesn’t have to refer to the physical world – just to other words. What these machines demonstrate is that language works as a system of signs that mostly refer just to other signs.
But does that preclude intelligence? Arguably all interaction with the world is through, or understood through, signs.
But does that preclude intelligence? Arguably all interaction with the world is through, or understood through, signs.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/advice-sam-altman-read-jacques-040...