Why 'LLMs are just next-token predictors' is a contentless argument
Aaroth · x · 2026-09-25
Responding to the recurring Twitter/Bluesky debate over whether LLMs are "only" next-token predictors or stochastic parrots, Aaroth argues the label is technically contentless: any mapping from inputs to output strings can be factored into a sequence of next-token distributions. It's a boring syntactic fact about probability distributions, and makes no claim about whether brains work like LLMs internally—so using it as a put-down isn't a substantive argument.
More from AGI Musings
- An AI model's 8-point answer on how humans can thrive in the 'Age of Miracles' — daniel_mac8 · 2026-11-11
- Podcast with X's biggest AI account: how one post made Manus famous in the West — kimmonismus · 2026-11-11
- Area Chair: reviewing AI-written reviews of AI-generated papers, the only human in the loop — murat_kocaoglu_ · 2026-11-11
- Dev Dimillian calls for content on AI-assisted work vs. pure AI slop — Dimillian · 2026-11-11
- How long until a phone-runnable model solves a Millennium Prize Problem — and Siri still lags? — paul_cal · 2026-11-11
- Superforecasters cut ASI timeline by 3 years to 2028, citing METR report — ben_j_todd · 2026-11-11