Haha. I enjoyed that Soviet-era joke at the end.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22Good_day,_fellow!%22_%22Axe...
11–20 of 240 posts
Haha. I enjoyed that Soviet-era joke at the end.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22Good_day,_fellow!%22_%22Axe...
As far as I can tell they don’t say which LLM they used which is kind of a shame as there is a huge range of capabilities even in newly released LLMs (e.g. reasoning vs not).
Sota LLMs do play legal moves in chess, I don't why the article seem to say otherwise.
This essay could probably benefit from some engagement with the literature on “interpretability” in LLMs, including the empirical results about how knowledge (like addition) is represented inside the neural network. To be blunt, I’m not sure being smart and reasoning from first principles after asking the LLM a lot of questions and cherry picking what it gets wrong gets to any novel insights at this point. And it alr…
With LLMs being unable to count how many Bs are in blueberry, they clearly don't have any world model whatsoever. That addition (something which only takes a few gates in digital logic) happens to be overfit into a few nodes on multi-billion node networks is hardly a surprise to anyone except the most religious of AI believers.
Is this a real defect, or some historical thing?
I just asked GPT-5:
How many "B"s in "blueberry"?
and it replied: There are 2 — the letter b appears twice in "blueberry".
I also asked it how many Rs in Carrot, and how many Ps in Pineapple, amd it answered both questions correctly too.As far as I can tell they don’t say which LLM they used which is kind of a shame as there is a huge range of capabilities even in newly released LLMs (e.g. reasoning vs not).
Haha. I enjoyed that Soviet-era joke at the end.
Yes, I hadn't heard that before. It's similar in spirit to this norwegian folk tale about a deaf man guessing what someone is saying to him: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22Good_day,_fellow!%22_%22Axe...
King Frederick, the great of Prussia had a very fine army, and none of the soldiers in it were finer than Giant Guards, who were all extremely tall men. It was difficult to find enough soldiers for these Guards, as there were not many men who were tall enough.
Frederick had made it a rule that no soldiers who did not speak German could be admitted to the Giant Guards, and this made the work of the officers who had to find men for them even more difficult. When they had to choose between accepting or refusing a really tall man who knew no German, the officers used to accept him, and then teach him enough. German to be able to answer if the King questioned him.
Frederick, sometimes, used to visit the men who were on guard around his castle at night to see that they were doing their job properly, and it was his habit to ask each new one that he saw three questions: “How old are you?” “How long have you been in my army?” and “Are you satisfied with your food and your conditions?”
The offices of the Giant Guards therefore used to teach new soldiers who did not know German the answers to these three questions.
One day, however, the King asked a new soldier the questions in a different order, he began with, “How long have you been in my army?” The young soldier immediately answered, “Twenty – two years, Your Majesty”. Frederick was very surprised. “How old are you then?”, he asked the soldier. “Six months, Your Majesty”, came the answer. At this Frederick became angry, “Am I a fool, or are you one?” he asked. “Both, Your Majesty”, the soldier answered politely.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtG0ACIbmHw Sota LLMs do play legal moves in chess, I don't why the article seem to say otherwise.
https://dynomight.net/more-chess/
This is significant in general because I personally would love to get these things to code-switch into "hackernews poster" or "writer for the Economist" or "academic philosopher", but I think the "chat" format makes it impossible. The inaccessibility of this makes me want to host my own LLM...
When I went to uni, we had tutorials several times a week. Two students, one professor, going over whatever was being studied that week. The professor would ask insightful questions, and the students would try to answer.
Sometimes, I would answer a question correctly without actually understanding what I was saying. I would be spewing out something that I had read somewhere in the huge pile of books, and it would be a sentence, with certain special words in it, that the professor would accept as an answer.
But I would sometimes have this weird feeling of "hmm I actually don't get it" regardless. This is kinda what the tutorial is for, though. With a bit more prodding, the prof will ask something that you genuinely cannot produce a suitable word salad for, and you would be found out.
In math-type tutorials it would be things like realizing some equation was useful for finding an answer without having a clue about what the equation actually represented.
In economics tutorials it would be spewing out words about inflation or growth or some particular author but then having nothing to back up the intuition.
This is what I suspect LLMs do. They can often be very useful to someone who actually has the models in their minds, but not the data to hand. You may have forgotten the supporting evidence for some position, or you might have missed some piece of the argument due to imperfect memory. In these cases, LLM is fantastic as it just glues together plausible related words for you to examine.
The wheels come off when you're not an expert. Everything it says will sound plausible. When you challenge it, it just apologizes and pretends to correct itself.