The ability to write a novel is different from actually writing a novel. If prediction forms the basis of (at least some forms of) intelligence, intelligence itself is more than prediction.
That's why I say our vocabulary for talking about these things leaves something to be desired - the way we use the word "intelligence" combines both raw/potential ability to do something (prediction), and the experience we have that allows that ability to be utilized. The only way you are going to learn to actually write a novel is by a lot of reading and writing and learning how to write something that provides the experience you hope it to have.
We get prompts all the time, it's called sensory input.
Instead of "write a noval" it's more like information about literature, life experience, that partner who broke our heart and triggered our writing this personal novel, and so on.
Some people write novels, some don't. Why some people do so we sometimes know, sometimes we don't (maybe they flipped a coin to decide). Some start to write but fail to finish.
You have to believe that humans have no free will in a certain way to have them be like an LLM, i.e, every action is externally driven and determined.
>You have to believe that humans have no free will in a certain way to have them be like an LLM, i.e, every action is externally driven and determined.
Free will doesn't have much meaning. If I dont base my action at time t, on their development based on inputs on times before t, what would I base it on?
It would be random?
Or would there be a small thinking presense inside me that gets information about my current situation and decides "impartially", able to decide in whatever direction, because it wasn't itself entirely determined by my experiences thus far?