Comment by Sharlin
4 hours ago
Half of this is arguing about semantics, which is incredibly boring. If you don’t like the words "motivation" or "intent", use the actual term of art, "goal". Which these systems definitely have, and which any chain-of-thought model factors into subgoals and sub-subgoals.
The other half doesn’t seem to realize that LLMs now run in loops for hours and hours, nothing like the basic "human prompt -> reply -> stop" conversation interface.
> If you don’t like the words "motivation" or "intent", use the actual term of art, "goal". Which these systems definitely have
They don’t. Not the way the author is discussing.
> The other half doesn’t seem to realize that LLMs now run in loops for hours and hours
They do not.
As I said, the author’s semantical argument is boring and brings nothing new to the conversation.
> They do not.
Have you lived under a rock?