> You can say that about anything.
That is true. But it is also true that you can approach any topic from low-level or high-level. So I'm not sure I get your point here. > You can say that about anything.
That is true. But it is also true that you can approach any topic from low-level or high-level. So I'm not sure I get your point here.> How they interpret one another and respond.
That sounds like it just falls back to "how LLMs work". It's the wrong level of abstraction in this case, because it's one level down from the topic being discussed here.
> because it's one level down
So we're in agreement?Aren't we after the "low-level"? That's this whole conversation... yes, it is a level down, that's my whole point. Just as my original analogy with assembly being a level down from C. Working at the metal, as they say. In the weeds.
I honestly don't know how to respond because I'm saying "this is too high-level" and you're arguing "you're too low-level". I'm sorry, but when you do stuff at the low-level you in fact have to crouch down and put your face to the ground. The lower the better. You're trying to see something very small, we're not trying to observe mountains here