Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism

Re:Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism by OrangeMusic on Sunday May 31, 2026 @04:14AM (#48343934)

> If you give them an infinite amount of time and processing, that wouldn't change.

Hrm I doubt it actually. Llms are capable of discovery, as recent math news showed. This means a "society" of Llms could likely have progress.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism by pona-a on Sunday May 31, 2026 @06:38AM (#48344610)

Only by having the LLM random walk the hypothesis space with a validator rejecting invalid ones.

The reason why LLM hypotheses are any good is because it already consumed a civilization worth of knowledge. You couldn't have bootstrapped such system with nothing but a few priors/axioms and let it discover the universe.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism by Self-Perfection on Monday June 01, 2026 @07:24PM (#48363898)

Well yes, LLM need rich and favorable substrate to grow and learn (or we might say bootstrap)

As well as DNA needs specific substrate (cell with ribosomes and other machinery). As well as humans (one need oxygen atmosphere, food, parents).

But in the world we live in existence of favorable substrate for humans or LLMs is a given thing. It is _already_ bootstrapped. Can we infer something about LLM limits or possibility of it achieving AGI from its bootstrapping requirements?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Leo's first encyclical attacks technological messianism by joemazerino on Sunday May 31, 2026 @09:57AM (#48345723)

Only through direction from a mind.

[ Parent | on HN ]