That is to show the relative cost between imitation and discovery. Evolution is on the order of 0.3 trillion times slower than catching up by imitation.
That is to show the relative cost between imitation and discovery. Evolution is on the order of 0.3 trillion times slower than catching up by imitation.
No human ingests that many tokens of speech; individually we learn from far fewer tokens.
"We only need x tokens of ingested speech" to learn language doesn't hit the same when you have billions of years of the brain baking in an oven to get to that point.
But i agree, it's not a direct comparison.
Why can't we start out a transformer at a better state and then teach it language in few tokens? Seems like a problem with architecture.
There's nothing wrong with blank slates. It's not a problem, whatever that means. It just is.
Seems a loooong stretch to say the least.
How much input did the Kalahari bushmen of that time, and their ancestors also, have to that infintesimal leap forwards?