AI sounds grand. We all have some sort of idea what is AI but still we imagine circuits thinking, learning, plotting. Yet large language models only predict the next word. That is maths, not mind.
When a chatbot finishes a proverb or drafts a policy note it feels as though meaning guided the pen, but under the hood billions of weighted connections are simply nudging probabilities.
Words follow statistics the way water follows gravity, always choosing the steepest descent through a canyon of past examples. Gravity is powerful, yet blind.
Imagine a digital parrot on steroids. The bird mimics sounds without grasping their sense. An LLM mimics text yet scales the trick across the internet. Size never grants insight.
Trouble appears off the map. Ask about an obscure topic and the model may hallucinate. It fills gaps with guesses because the pattern grows thin. Confidence deceives.
Yet the tool has value. It drafts emails, summarises papers, checks your grammar and spurs ideas in seconds. Humans then check facts and shape nuance. Partnership beats worship.
Names matter. Calling these engines “intelligent” hides the need for human judgement. Calling them parrots keeps us alert to bias and error. Stay sceptical.
Leave a Reply