I get the feeling you don't really have much experience using LLMs so maybe give them a try more in depth and then maybe you can explain more clearly the difference between an LLM outputting text after processing and a human outputting text after thinking. So far you've just said some of the low level stuff and threw around a bunch of buzz words.

That's a meaningless semantic distinction though. Just do a find-and-replace of "thinking" with "evaluating node weights" if it makes you feel better.

It might not be the same methodology as human thinking, but anthropomorphizing the systems gives us humans a better way to view what's going on and the output behavior.

No you don't. Part of journalism is to connect the dots and make some conjectures. There are definitely some sources that will lend a more left or right wing view of the facts, but there's not really any way to have "just the facts" without some sort of leaning, especially as a lot of people view the facts as having a lean to the left

You have to put your name and address on the "blank outside envelope" or they won't count your vote though.

Maybe you're bad at communicating or reading my response in that case.

Can you explain the exact difference? Is it something magic like a soul that makes humans different?

LLMs have been out for years now. It's not really the "highly experimental tool with mostly unknown characteristics" as when you last looked at it.

The humans are also predicting what should go next based on what fits using their experience and learnings. Pretty similar in this case

What a pointless post.

Everyone knows that bots backed by LLMs aren't people, they're just using words to explain the actions in a way that's more understandable to humans. As a human, this is more helpful since it would be a pretty lame article just listing the weights that guided the decisions made by the model

There are lots of tools I don't know how to use which are complicated and require some learning to use. For example I've never learned the 3d modelling software Blender and opening it looks hard to use. Does that make people who know how to use Blender and find it helpful that tell me to read the manual "pathetic and not very smart"?

I guess all code is based on existing code bases if that's how you want to go with it. Nothing is written from scratch except people that have never been exposed to code before.

Not the view most people would go with but it has a certainty to it for sure

The people calling all AI output slop are the ones that messed around with LLMs a couple years ago and then didn't keep up with them. Most new software now contains code generated by LLMs

What would you call it then? Doesn't look like it's built off an existing code base

Some places they do end up in neighborhoods like this one:
https://www.google.com/maps/@4...

The TDS sufferers are the ones that think the Iran war is actually going well and gas is cheaper

We'll just add that to the list of other things you'll never do - like reading the second sentence of the summary