You could probably trace how it comes up with the probabilities of the next token. Though the meaning of all the weights are probably going to be lost on you. Once you’ve got your probabilities and you’ve limited to some top number, it’s just a dice throw at that point.

I agree. Though, in practice, at least in internet arguments, people tend to “diagnose” people so they can dismiss them in some manner, rather than grapple with the argument being presented. In the “Oh, you are just a so and so, I don’t need to entertain this” kinda manner.

Misspellings are misspellings. They happen, nothing to get worked up about as long as you can decode what was said. But whatever, if it annoys you, it annoys you.

It’s been a couple of days now, and I’m replying through the response reply so I’m lacking rereading the context. But my memory here, was someone was explaining it as a potential joke in a typical social fashion, where you’d expect people to have a bit of chuckle but know that’s not really the case.

Instead a bunch of people are getting so literal and piling on them for not being correct, I suspect they already knew they were unlikely to be correct.

It’s the kind of response that sucks the fun out the internet. It just teaches people, no-one will appreciate a bit of playing around and everything becomes a little more sterile.

That the misspelling is amusing because if you look at it in a certain way it would still apply to AI/LLM companies. Whether it was intended or not.

Do we always have to be so tight and literal about everything?