Hacker News Reader

Comment by Salgat | Hacker News Reader

Unfortunately LLMs fail even basic logic tests given to children so definitely not high praise. I'm just highlighting the absurd amount of data they need versus humans to highlight that they're just spitting out regressions on the training data. We're talking data that would take a human countless thousands of lifetimes to ingest. Yet a human can accomplish infinitely more with a basic grade school education.

View on HN

Humans can achieve more within one (or two, or a few) narrowly scoped field(s), after a lot of hard work and effort. LLMs can display a basic level of competency (with some mistakes) in almost any topic known to mankind. No one reasonably expects a LLM to be able to do the former, and humans certainly cannot do the latter.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

Also, your comparison is unfair. You've chosen an exceptional high achiever as your example of a human to compare against LLMs. If you instead compare the average human, LLMs don't look so bad even when the human has the advantage of specialisation (e.g. medical diagnostics). A LLM can do reasonably well against an average (not exceptional) person with just a basic grade school education if asked to produce an essay on some topic.

>Humans can achieve more within one (or two, or a few) narrowly scoped field(s), after a lot of hard work and effort.

>No one reasonably expects a LLM to be able to do the former

I can feel Sam Altman's rage building ...

Yeah, I think many investors do expect that ...

With Google I can demonstrate a wide breadth of knowledge too. LLM's aren't unique in that aspect.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com