Yeah that article is so full of bullshit that I don’t believe it’s main claim. Comparing LLM’s to understanding built by children, saying it makes “creative content”, that LLM’s do “chain of thought” without prompting. It presents the two sides as at all equal in logical reasoning: as if the mystical intepretation is on the same level of rigor as the systems explanation. Sorry, but I’m entirely unconvinced by this article that I should take this seriously. There are thousands of websites that do translation with natural language taking examples from existing media and such (duolingo did this for a long time, and sold those results), literally just mining that data gives the basis to easily build a network of translations that seem like natural language with no mysticism