If they conceptualize, why do they sometimes spit out nonsensical BS?
Let’s flip this around - How can you tell the difference between an LLM being able to conceptualize yet being wrong sometimes vs. not being able to conceptualize?
Without knowing anything about machine learning and bearing in mind AI is super hyped up with marketing BS right now, it sounds like “emergent properties” are in the eye of the beholder and not actually evidence of some higher order intelligence at work.
We already had this, it’s called Intel Optane Persistent Memory and Intel killed it off last year: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/memory-storage/optane-persistent-memory/overview.html
The memory speed was slightly slower than DDR4 but the benefits didn’t seem to outweigh the downsides. I think it probably kicked a lot of ass for specific use cases (eg. in-memory database that needs persistence), but the market was too small. Plus, SSDs are getting so ridiculously fast that it would put pressure on a product like this too.
This was really insightful, thank you! I also loved how Bard’s output completely mistakes the common physics riddle. (I have a physics background and your analysis is spot on IMHO.)