I have my own challenge: I think LLMs can do everything that a human can do and typically way better if the context required for the problem can fit in 10,000 tokens.
For now this challenge is text only.
Can we think of anything that LLMs can’t do?
For now this challenge is text only.
Can we think of anything that LLMs can’t do?
That is like saying, "My program is better than any human, but binary inputs only!"..
Even restricted to text, the LLMs are not better than a human who is expert in a domain. Try talking to it regarding any topic. Even in topics that I am not an expert it, the responses from LLMs quickly becomes bland and uninteresting and devoid of additional information..
This is true even in tech things that after a certain point, I stop talking to it and search for a blog/post/so answer written by a human, which if found, would immediately break the plateau of progress that I was facing with the LLM.
Not very interesting.
Then you’re either going to say it can or you’re going to say that requires more than 10000 tokens.
This isn’t an interesting conversation and I don’t think you are presenting this challenge in good faith for the reason I gave above.
There are several models with greater than 1200 elo
at the beginning 2022 it was useless because the output was garbage (hallucinations and fake data).
nowadays its still useless, but for different reasons. it just regurgitates things already known and published and is unable to come up with novel hypotheses and mechanisms and how to test them. which makes sense, for how i understand LLMs operate.
So you may as well ask “is there anything a python script can’t do”. It’s just not a meaningful question.
* write interesting prose
* generate realistic images
You deleted it but still come on. Why would you even think to write that?