Post

I have also called LLMs spicy autofill. I’m not convinced that her take is a bad one for the masses. They need to understand that it’s not magic and that it has no intent or understanding.

I absolutely agree with this, I just think there’s a difference between showing how normal and usual it is and pretending ‘linear algebra’ is table stakes for most people imo

like, that doesn’t exhaust what it is exactly even if it’s a useful frame shift. but also linear algebra got hands, so to speak

I agree that it’s not magic, but I disagree that it has no intent or understanding. I have a strong argument for understanding, and a somewhat weaker argument for intent, if you’re interested in either. I think claiming they don’t have understanding is harmful for the masses. Intent, eh.

Great! But first — are you familiar enough with Emily Bender’s “they don’t have meaning” argument that I should explain why I disagree with it? Or should I just proceed with my own argument?

I generally object to the preconception that simple things are not impressive. simple things are amazing. these may become even simpler in the future. simplicity is next to elegance

i mean, it really is just y = mx + b, but in the same way that advanced anthropology is 'just' "we live in a society"