I don't think Turing knew about the existence of the lambda calculus when he wrote the paper. It was later that he decided to study his PhD under Church and move to Princeton.
A year ago he said that language models would never be able to explain why if you move a table, the bottle on top of it would not fall. He definitely had no idea what was coming with LLMs. And now he is arrogant enough to say "we all knew what capabilities LLMs would have". He has no intelectual humility or honesty at all. I at least admit openly that language models blew my mind.
Lost respect for his opinions massively after seeing how he lied about the topic.
I have been thinking a lot about it recently and I do think they are significant.
If you look for example at chagpt4, it achieves a certain sort of intelligence. It gives you many sensible responses.
The thing Is that this is basically what we humans do. Give so-so explanations about all sorts of stuff that are reasonable-sounding.
Im confident that they well become evidently better than all of us. More complete arguments, with better data backing that up that the regular folk. In some sense I feel that they almost above that threshold.
The basic opinions of people are neither sophisticated nor deep. And llms are always improving to become exactly that.
This should be a required reading for everyone at OpenAI. If such simple programs can fool even intelligent people, I can't imagine what an infinitely more capable gpt4 will be able to achieve socially.
As Yuval Harari correctly points out, with the current mastery of language, AIs are starting to hack the OS on which humans operate: words and ideas.