Most people on Earth try to put what they're seeing into the context of what they understand; mental gymnastics to try and understand what is happening based on their prior experience. They have absolutely 0 understanding of how it works under the hood so, to them, it must be alive.
An LLM with CoT is Turing-complete. Training is, basically, compression (the training data gets lossily compressed into the model's weights). The information-theoretic limit of compression is an algorithm that reproduces functionality of a system that produced the training data.
No "magic" is required to get to a system that reproduces at least some facets of the human brain functionality.
Three years ago I was skeptical that stochastic gradient descent (and other known techniques) are the way. But evidence kept piling up.
Given arbitrarily large context window.
The one thing this 2023 article gets partially correct imo is that any intelligence we see in AI (as of 2026) is our own - not that it’s a mirror but that the intelligence comes from the way that the words are put together, which comes from written human language created by (allegedly) intelligent creatures put in as input in both the training and prompt, among other places.
Rearranging and repeating the words, even in context, does not intelligence make. I’m not even convinced that you’re intelligent, dear reader.