[another_poster]

The author is drawing the wrong the conclusion-knowledge relationships can be asymmetric.

The forward relationship of a fact (What is Tom Cruise’s favorite color? Green) may be worth knowing, but the reverse relationship (Who’s favorite color is green? A billion people, including Tom Cruise) may not be worth knowing.

[cratermoon]

Are you saying that if "Tom Cruise's parent is Mary Lee Pfeiffer" then "Who is Mary Lee Pfeiffer the parent of?" is asymmetric? That Mary Lee Pfeiffer is NOT the parent of Tom Cruise?

[another_poster]

You’re right—both directions are true. But my point is that only the forward (or reverse) direction of a fact may be worth knowing.

We frequently only posses recall for one direction of a fact. Why? One direction may be important (what is Tom Cruise’s favorite color?), but the other direction may not (whose favorite color is green?).

So if we inquire into whether LLMs actually possess intelligence, their asymmetric knowledge seems similar to human knowledge and hence seems consistent with intelligence, rather than problematic.

[cratermoon]

Allow me to point out other comment threads here suggesting "humans sometimes exhibit unintelligent behavior" isn't an especially convincing argument.