[mettamage]

Hmm saying it’s random-ish is doing it a disservice. I understand it’s a stochastic process but there’s definitely some level of understanding. Not at the level of lived experience but usually an LLM with vision capabilities can call a spade a spade and do something useful with it. And when a verification function shows how they are wrong then they usually come with a better and more informed approach.

So I can’t fully see how that’s related to the infinite monkeys. A typewriting monkey doesn’t have access to a verification function. And even if it did, it would not be the original concept anymore with infinite typewriting monkeys producing the works of Shakespeare.

Nevertheless, I upvoted your comment because it’s definitely insightful.

[dwattttt]

"understanding" is overstating it. Correlation between tokens embedded in the weights via training, yes.

[anon84873628]

Feedback loops certainly seem to give them some level of understanding.

Agent reads a skill file about how to use a CLI tool. It tries to use the tool but gets an error about the input format. It tries again with a different format based on the error message, and sees that command succeeded. It compares what worked to what was in the skill file and notes the difference. On future invocations it continues to use the new format.

Is that not "understanding" how to use the tool?

[hgoel]

What exactly would you call understanding? It's a correlation matrix of concepts.

[mountainriver]

What’s the difference? It’s clearly processing information and coming up with the right answer

[varjag]

Training is a loan word used to describe human learning process. For a reason.

[andix]

Humans learn on the job. LLMs don't. Very important difference.