%100 agree, I am testing o1 for some math problems. I asked that to prove convolution of two gaussian is gaussian. It gave me 3 page algebraic solution it is correct but not elegant nor good. I have seen more ingenious solution. These tools are really good at doing something but not good at doing like expert human as they claimed.
The goalposts are moving at the speed of light.
A few years ago if someone told us that you could ask a computer to compose a poem, critique a painting, write a professional 360 performance review based on notes, design a website based on a napkin sketch, prove convolution theorems, ... they would say that's a stretch even for sci-fi.
Now we have a single LLM that can do all of that, at some level of quality. Yet, the solutions are not elegant enough, the code not completely correct, the design is not inspired and the poem is "slop".
Nobody's saying that these aren't fascinating, just that it's not looking like their models are getting significantly better and better as all the hype wants you to believe.
Transformers + huge data set is incredible. But literally we've scraped all the data on the web and made huge sacrifices to our entire society already
There's no thought or reasoning behind anything LLMs generate, it's just a statistical pile of stuff. It's never going to generate anything new. It literally can't.
However, they are really good at highlighting just how many people will believe nonsense stated confidently.
It can't on it's own. But why does it need to? As a tool, the user can provide insight, imagination, soul, or guidance.
And let's be honest, very little in our life, work, entertainment or science is completely new. We all stand on the shoulders of giants, remix existing work and reinterpreting existing work.
If it's the latter, then agreed it doesn't produce anything new but so doesn't most of humanity and it doesn't need to, to be able to be of assistance.