Comment by bko
11 days ago
If you say LLMs are a dead end, and you give a few examples of things they will never be able to do, and a few months later they do it, and you just respond by stating that sure they can do that but they're still a dead end and won't be able to do this.
Rinse and repeat.
After a while you question whether LLMs are actually a dead end
This is a normal routine topical in Epistemology in the perspective of Lakatos.
As I said, it will depend on whether the examples in question were actually substantial part of the "core belief".
For example: "But can they perform procedures?" // "Look at that now" // "But can they do it structurally? Consistently? Reliably?" // "Look at that now" // "But is that reasoning integrated or external?" // "Look at that now" // "But is their reasoning fully procedurally vetted?" (etc.)
I.e.: is the "progress" (which would be the "anomaly" in scientific prediction) part of the "substance" or part of the "form"?