[paulddraper]

As far as anyone can tell, there is virtually no similarity between brains and LLMs.

Neural nets were named such because they have connected nodes. And that’s it.

[permo-w]

this so obviously not true that I can't fathom why you would say it

[bravesoul2]

Matrix multiplication and some non linearities (gates) to ensure it ain't just a linear regression. Not like my brain.

[permo-w]

and yet here you are producing a string of text probabilistically related to the text I inputted into your brain

[bravesoul2]

Orthorogonal:

1. Is the brain deterministic and lacking free will.

2. Does a brain use matmul or something else.

[permo-w]

1. almost certainly yes

2. completely irrelevant. GP said that LLMs share nothing in common with brains. responding probabilistically to text is something in common with brains. even if we don't want to get into the nuts and bolts of how ANNs work, the actual input/output structure is common with LLMs

[bravesoul2]

But the thing LLMs have in common with brains is they process data and produce data that with additional processing a subset of which can be interpreted as words. It is a pretty loose link.

Like saying an aeroplane is like a squirrel because they both perform aerobic respiration.

Original comment that I agree with, for reference:

> As far as anyone can tell, there is virtually no similarity between brains and LLMs. Neural nets were named such because they have connected nodes. And that’s it.

[paulddraper]

“Artificial Neural Networks were somewhat based off of the human brain.

“Some of the frameworks that made LLMs what they are today are too based of our understanding of how the brain works.”

[permo-w]

these quotes do not change lack of truth in the original statement

there are far more similarities between a brain and an LLM than containing nodes

[paulddraper]

I misread, I thought you said "so obviously true."

I won't offer a rebuttal to that statement.