← Back to context

Comment by lxgr

5 hours ago

At what point does autocomplete stop being "just autocomplete"?

Clearly there's a limit. For example, if an alien autocomplete implementation were to fall out of a wormhole that somehow manages to, say, accurately complete sentences like "S&P 500, <tomorrow's date>:" with tomorrow's actual closing value today, I'd call that something else.

You can call it however you want. The point of using the term autocomplete is to make the underlying technology relatable and remove the mystic from it. In any case, your alien autocomplete wouldn’t be an LLM if it can predict the future

> At what point does autocomplete stop being "just autocomplete"?

Every single discussion on the internet is a repeat of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loki%27s_wager it seems…

  • > The point of using the term autocomplete is to make the underlying technology relatable and remove the mystic from it.

    I think it fails to do that. It's the wrong level of abstraction. Or is it helpful to model an ISA as the individual atoms making up a CPU implementing it?

    > Every single discussion on the internet is a repeat of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loki%27s_wager it seems…

    If you don't like that, why amplify it by throwing around known unhelpful categories?

    • I don’t think I do, obviously. And have no interest discussing where arbitrary boundaries are located