Imagine an LLM was trained on the internet before LLMs were invented. It knows everything in the world. Every programming concept, every philosophical and logical concept. It is an "expert" on the then-current state of the art in machine learning.
Would it be able to invent itself?
I'm not moving the goalposts here. Language models are extremely impressive. I think they will change the world. I fear they will displace many jobs.
Maybe some day they will be able to invent themselves. Maybe that will come sooner than we think. As it stands, they couldn't. This is the distinction that you say doesn't exist.
First of all, you've just imagined a scenario, invented a conclusion that you can't prove and justified your distinction on your invented conclusion. Your distinction is no less arbitrary than when this conversation started.
Next, you're conflating different things. How many humans are capable of inventing anything at all ? Have you invented anything in your field of expertise? Should i then question everything you do understand bout your field if you haven't ? Do you think understanding is binary ?
Ok, I feel this conversation is not going anywhere. If I see a single example of an LLM generating new theories then I will immediately change my mind. I have yet to see this.
Most humans are not capable of inventing things, you're right, but humans in aggregate are. We are comparing LLMs to "humans" here, not to "a human". There are no examples of LLMs doing this. Maybe in a couple of years, who knows.
Would it be able to invent itself?
I'm not moving the goalposts here. Language models are extremely impressive. I think they will change the world. I fear they will displace many jobs.
Maybe some day they will be able to invent themselves. Maybe that will come sooner than we think. As it stands, they couldn't. This is the distinction that you say doesn't exist.