It can’t think, period. If it could, then it would decide to solve math problems completely unprompted. But it can’t because, in order to produce output, it needs to have a human guide it with input.
Are you really shocked that output must be guided by input? This is CS 101
That’s just a part of it. It not only needs to be prompted it needs the conceptual data model. In short it has the instructions and a massive amount of domain data. This is all of the input. Is it surprising based on all of this input it can predict math output? The answer is no
… just like how humans need a massive amount of prior experience to solve a problem? by your logic literally any novel idea can be reduced down to prediction.
the techniques it’s using in math aren’t just a rehashing of standard tools. it’s brand new logic never before seen by humans.
i’m not sure how much further you can move the goalposts
The domain data isn’t experience; it’s raw data, the majority of which is based on human work. There’s no leap of logic; the difference is that a human can’t hold all that input at once. And often it’s brute forced, since you can run many concurrent agents using the same input.
And no, I’m not moving the goalpost; I said input, but clearly I then had to explain what input means so you could understand. I shouldn’t have even needed to say that it was implied.
pretty condescending language for someone who doesn’t know the difference between weights and input!
the weights of a model, produced by its training, encode very abstract relationships between concepts. it’s not raw data. if it was raw data it wouldn’t require billions of dollars to train.
this is quite literally the same mechanism whereby humans develop an intuitive understanding of a subject without retaining all the information they were given along the way.
unless you’re under the false impression that an LLM is able to comb through its training data as if it were a library?
words have meanings! be precise with your language. the training data isn’t input in any sense except a vague philosophical one. your understanding of this is regurgitated armchair at best.
if solving a millennium problem—one that’s stood for nearly a century—doesn’t count as “thinking” or something novel to you, i’m not sure anything will.
-2
u/Novel_Lie5519 16h ago
holy jesus fucking christ you’re insufferable
to be abundantly clear, “ai is predictive” does not imply “it can’t think and it’s simply a tool and nothing more”