[tptacek]

Right, but your narrative was incorrect and based on faulty premises, which you haven't acknowledged. That's fine, except you're still pressing the argument.

Can you please present a reasonable maths problem that I can bounce off GPT so we can see it fail? I can give you many hundreds of relatively complex problems, none of which have appeared in a textbook, that GPT has not only solved, but critiqued my own crappy solutions for. I'm only asking you for one counterpoint.

[schneems]

> your narrative was incorrect and based on faulty premises

I am referring to specific, documented behavior of LLMs. Google it.

[tptacek]

Google any plausibly reasonable math problem, and even the terrible LLM that powers the Google search page will almost certainly solve it correctly for you.

I don't need to reconstruct my argument axiomatically from folk beliefs.

[schneems]

You seem to have misunderstood my comment. I'm happy to accept the fault for poor communication. But you're making it hard. You're signaling that any clarifications on my behalf will be treated as further arguments instead of some sort of shared desire to hear one another. I don't care to continue.