← Back to context

Comment by alehlopeh

10 hours ago

How is conceptualizing what the model is doing as having a conversation any different from any other abstraction? “No, the browser isn’t downloading a file. The electrons in the silicon are actually…”

There are people with a philosophical objection to using everyday words to describe LLM interactions for various reasons, but commonly because they're worried stupid people will confuse the LLM for a person. Which, I suppose stupid people will do that, but I'm not inventing a parallel language or putting a * next to each thing which means "this, but with an LLM instead of a person"

  • That is an interesting way of looking at that, thanks for the perspective!

    Like, the words fit… why create a second parallel language for describing LLM behavior.

    Somebody else said it… the whole “it’s a stochastic parrot” thing is sooooo cliche and boring at this point. It’s like, duh… what is your point?