Hacker News Reader

Yes. That is correct. If I told you I planned on going outside this evening to test whether the sun sets in the east, the best response would be to let me know ahead of time that my hypothesis is wrong.

View on HN

So, based on the source of "Trust me bro.", we'll decide this open question about new technology and the nature of cognition is solved. Seems unproductive.

In addition to what I have posted elsewhere in here, I would point to the fact that this is not indeed an "open question", as LLMs have not produced an entirely new and more advanced model of physics. So there is no reason to suppose they could have done so for QM.

What if making progress today is harder than it was then?

The problem is that it hasn't really made any significant new concepts in physics. I'm not even asking for quantum mechanics 2.0, I'm just asking for a novel concept that, much like QM and a lot of post-classical physics research, formulates a novel way of interpreting the structure of the universe.

> as LLMs have not produced an entirely new and more advanced model of physics.

That's a bar that only a handful of humans have met in the entirety of history.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com