This is almost certainly what is happening in the human brain, since symbolic reasoning is not something that humans naturally have 'out-of-the-box', and has to be learned. Until very very recently in our evolutionary history we were not capable of it at all, and probably ~50% of homo sapiens sapiens "humans" living in the world today are still not capable of it

I think he's right about the over-enthusiasm for LLMs in isolation and throwing money at scaling though. But I don't see it as a setback or a point of serious contention. It has still sped things up by dumping an enormous amount of money, resources, attention, and talent into AI, which would not have been dedicated to AI otherwise. It has been unequivocally a good thing

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749924&forum_id=2Reputation#49098373)

i agree with you about the standard scaling view. i do not see scaling of the generic transformer architecture as likely to produce broad, human level capabilities. connectionism could implemented in many different ways though. i agree with him about the generalization problems with current models, but he makes the leap straight to "therefore we need symbolic methods." i think we just need a different form of connectionism - that's what the biology says.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749924&forum_id=2Reputation#49098447)

He's a great case study on why it's important to not be a fucking clown. He has been right about some things and he is imo right about his criticisms of LLMs but nobody takes him seriously because he's an obnoxious clown who is obviously on a personal crusade against people who he believes have wronged him personally

You can't cry wolf over and over again and expect to make a positive difference in the world or in your chosen field

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5749924&forum_id=2Reputation#49098342)