Hacker News Reader

They're a model of language, not of the world.

A model of language is a model of the world, else it being pure gibberish.

A model of language is a model of a tiny specialized part of the world: language.

And if anybody gets annoyed that my comment is tautological, get annoyed by the people that made the comment necessary.

When you ask an LLM a question about cars, it needs an inner representation of what a car is (how imperfect it may be) to answer your question. A model of "language" as you want to define it would output a grammatically correct wall of text that goes nowhere.

A map of how concepts relate in language is not a model of the world, except on the extremely limited sense that languages are part or the world.

And yeah, that wasn't clear before people created those machines that can speak but can't think. But it should be completely obvious to anybody that interacts with them for a small while.

"How concepts relate" is called a model. That it uses language to be interacted with is irrelevant to the fact that it's a model of of a worldly concept.

What of multi modal models according to you ? Are they "models of eyesight", "models of sound", or pixels or wavelengths... C'mon.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com