Define "do" in this context. If you mean hardware-accelerated matmul, then machines have been doing that for half a century.

On every occasion you could have made exactly the same point.

Oh god, you know it.

Telephone ... boots?

Napkin scribbles

It's nice that you say partially, that's bit different from every other HN comment that wondered this. Yeah, probably partially, as in, you have reason, you add in language, you get more reason.

Explanation of reason and reasoning paths is a product of manipulating language.

Most ideas, even in the reasoning fields, are generated in non-linguistic processes.

Of course, some problems are solved by step-by-step linguistic (or math) A, then B, then C steps, etc., but even for those types of problems, when they get complex, the solution looks more like follow a bunch of paths to dead ends, think some more, go away, and then "Aha!" the idea of a solution pops into our head, then we back it up and make it explicit with the linguistic/logical 'chain of reasoning' to explain it to others. That solution did not come from manipulating language, but from some other cognitive processes we do not understand, but the explanation of it used language.

LLMs aren't even close to that type of processing.

I am sure that if I am a fancy auto-complete, I'm way fancier than LLMs. A whole different category of fancy way above their league. Not just me, but any living human is.

I am so sure because of the self-evidence of my experience, the results of 2 millennia of analysis into the nature of cognition and experience, and consideration of the material composition of our organism (we obviously have lots of critical analog components, which are not selecting tokens, but instead connecting with flows from other continua).

Prediction is obviously involved in certain forms of cognition, but it obviously isn't all there is to the kinds of beings we are.