Of course you could also argue that human intention comes from largely deterministic processes emerging from the brain. That may eventually perhaps lead to all figures of speech involving things like intentionality meaningless.
This type of response is just stochastic parrotry, rather than displaying evidence of actual <whatever cognitive trait we're overconfidently insisting LLMs don't have>.
Yet more evidence that LLMs are more similar to humans than we give them credit for.
Never stops fascinating me how folks are arguing this kind of thing. Why make up an explanation for why this obvious mistake is actually some kind of elaborate 4D chess sarcastic "intention"? It's a simple machine, its network just didn't support making up a new Toy Story character. That's it! Simple as that! Occam's Razor anybody?
Or yes, maybe the regex I wrote the other day which also had a bug that missed replacing certain parts also had an "intention". It just wanted to demonstrate how fallible I am as a human, so it played this elaborate prank on me. /s
There are still a lot of Toy Story characters to come by, and it doesn't seem the franchise is about to end, as long as they keep a reasonable release cycle, Debian is safe ;)
I'm kind of curious how many there are left and how long they'd last. Also, how far are they already picked and what would be the absolute last resort choices.
Someone must have done the math. (Actual plans would actually probably be up somewhere as well, given Debian orgs nature.)
