Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What can LLMs never do?

strangeloopcanon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–385 of 385 posts

Re: What can LLMs never do?

#381

Post by danenania »

SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #380
danenania wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We know definitively that this is not how brains learn. Ok then, I guess the case is closed. > an entity needs to be able to form new memories dynamically. LLMs can form new memories dynamically. Just pop some new data into the context.

> LLMs can form new memories dynamically. Just pop some new data into the context. No, that's an illusion. The LLM itself is static. The recurrent connections form a soft-of temporary memory that doesn't affect the learned behavior of the network at all. I don't get why people who don't understand what's happening keep arguing that AIs are some sci-fi interpretation of AI. They're not. At least not yet.

It isn't temporary if you keep it permanently in context (or in a RAG store) and pass it into every model call, which is how long-term memory is being implemented both in research and in practice. And yes it obviously does affect the learned behavior. The distinction you're making between training and context is arbitrary.

Re: What can LLMs never do?

#382

Post by naasking »

SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #379
naasking wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We know definitively that this is not how brains learn. So you have mechanistic, formal model of how the brain functions? That's news to me.

There's no way brains have the "right answers" fed into them as required by backpropagation.

Look up predictive coding. Our senses are constantly feeding us corrections to our predictions.

Re: What can LLMs never do?

#383

Post by [deleted] »

autoexec wrote: post #358
PopePompus wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about general anesthesia? I had a major operation during which most of my brain was definitely offline for at least 8 hours.

Anesthesia shouldn't take your brain offline. It just makes you unconscious, paralyzes you, and gives you amnesia. Your brain is still active under general anesthesia. What you were thinking or feeling for those 8 hours was just forgotten.

[deleted]

Re: What can LLMs never do?

#384

Post by yosito »

tavern1991 wrote: post #376
yosito wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's try... Prompt: Predict which type of algorithm would be effective to solve sudoku. Response: A backtracking algorithm is typically best for solving Sudoku puzzles due to its efficiency in exploring all possible number placements systematically until it finds the correct solution. ...seemed to work well enough for me. Prompt 2: Which type of neural network is most efficient at solving sudoku? Response 2: Convolu…

To me it seems you can get the LLM to predict some tokens that contain words that point to the right algorithm. But the LLM doesn't know what it chose. It just sees some tokens. Do you think it could somehow tell it had chosen a CNN in its response and then do something with that knowledge to run a CNN?

Yes? LLMs are already doing that.

Re: What can LLMs never do?

#385

Post by SomeCallMeTim »

singron wrote: post #318
throwthrowuknow wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your definition of understanding? Please show me where the training data exists in the model to perform this lookup operation you’re supposing. If it’s that easy I’m sure you could reimplement it with a simple vector database. Your last two paragraphs are just dualism in disguise.

People are confusing the limited computational model of a transformer with the "Chinese room argument", which leads to unproductive simultaneous debates of computational theory and philosophy.

I'm not confusing anything. I'm familiar with the Chinese Room Argument and I know how LLMs work.

What I'm saying is arguably philosophically related, in that I'm saying the LLM's model is analogous to the "response book" in the room. It doesn't matter how big the book is; if the book never changes, then no learning can happen. If no learning can happen, then understanding, a process that necessarily involves active reflection on a topic, can exist.

You simply can't say a book "understands" anything. To understand is to contemplate and mentally model a topic to the point where you can simulate it, at least at a high level. It's dynamic.

An LLM is static. It can simulate a dynamic response by having multiple stages that dig through an multiple insanely large books of instructions that cross reference each other and that involve calculations and bookmarks and such to come up with a result--but the books never change as part of the conversation.

Post reply on HN