Does ChatGPT think like we do? It sounds like one of those questions a five-year-old might ask his dumbstruck parents. Why do you have to know whether Santa is real, honey? Isn’t it enough to get presents on Christmas morning?

Similarly, isn’t it enough that large language models (LLMs) can do amazing things like write code, turn complex technical documents into understandable tutorials, compose music, generate art, and pen an ode to Dunkin’ in the style of Shakespeare? (OK, we’ve all done that last one.) They’re dazzling tools with known limitations and they’re getting better every day. Isn’t that enough? Why does it matter whether what’s under their virtual hoods operates like what’s inside our bony skulls?

Clearly if an LLM can converse and dispense knowledge with the convincing authority of a professor, doctor or lawyer, it seems to be “thinking” in an everyday or instrumental sense. But it might also be an elaborate fake. If you get access to and memorize the answers the day before the test, a perfect score says nothing about your command of the material. Fakery always has limits. — Read More