

Yes, speed and the benefits of all the tooling and static analysis they’re bringing to Python. Python is great for many things but “analyzing Python” isn’t necessarily one of them.


Yes, speed and the benefits of all the tooling and static analysis they’re bringing to Python. Python is great for many things but “analyzing Python” isn’t necessarily one of them.


Yes, but that’s not how LLMs work. My statement depends heavily on the fact that a LLM like GPT is coaxed into coherence by unsupervised or semi-supervised training. That the training process works is the evidence of an internal model (of language/related concepts), not just the fact that something outputs coherent statements.


It must have some internal models of some things, or else it wouldn’t be possible to consistently make coherent and mostly reasonable statements. But the fact that it has a reasonable model of things like grammar and conversation doesn’t imply that it has a good model of literally anything else, which is unlike a human for whom a basic set of cognitive skills is presumably transferable. Still, the success of LLMs in their actual language-modeling objective is a promising indication that it’s feasible for a ML model to learn complex abstractions.
Content of the image is unrelated to this post FYI