“You could eat a bowl of soup with a fork. Slowly. … Enough time, enough energy. You can solve math problem with language. Enough time, enough energy. And human intelligence is based on a tough world where you don't have enough time and you don't have enough energy.”

so we were talking about the recent thing in the last week that everyone's talking about, which is LLM solving a mathematics problem that the singularities of the Navier-Stokes equations, this kind of stuff, right? This dynamics of fluids. And there was this long-lasting, you know, an outstanding question with a prize behind it about some properties of these equations, which is do they blow up and so on? Do they have singularities in them? And so out comes an LLM recently, and at considerable expense, I mean, tens of millions of dollars, thousands of agents, it finds a solution. But it's doing it by being fed text, not geometry. It doesn't have a visual apparatus. So what does that mean that we can solve math problems by only being trained on language? And that's what we were talking about. And I think what we've discovered, the interesting thing about purely linguistic intelligence, if you like, an LLM, is that you can solve almost any problem with it, but you solve it very inefficiently.

Right. And then you gave the example of eating soup, which I thought was brilliant.

we have a billion years testing ground to make it happen efficiently.

Exactly.

Because if we only got smart doing LLMs, we would have burnt our energy load hundreds of thousands of years ago. And we would have never gotten to where we are. Yeah,