> humans do not need 10,000 examples to tell the difference between cats and dogs
The optimization process that trained the human brain is called evolution, and it took a lot more than 10,000 examples to produce a system that can differentiate cats vs dogs.
Put differently, an LLM is pre-trained with very light priors, starting almost from scratch, whereas a human brain is pre-loaded with extremely strong priors.
> The optimization process that trained the human brain is called evolution, and it took a lot more than 10,000 examples to produce a system that can differentiate cats vs dogs.
Asserted without evidence. We have essentially no idea at what point living systems were capable of differentiating cats from dogs (we don't even know for sure which living systems can do this).
Sure, but can earthworms? Butterflies? Oak trees? Slime mould? At what point in the history of life did sufficient discrimination to differentiate e.g. a cat and a dog actually arise? Are the mechanisms used for this universal? Are some better than others? etc.
>The optimization process that trained the human brain is called evolution
A human brain that doesn't get visual stimulus at the critical age between 0 and 3 years old will never be able to tell the difference between a cat and a dog because it will be forevermore blind.
I heard a similar case before I did my A-levels, so at least 22 years ago, where the person had cateracts removed and it took a while to learn to see, something about having to touch a statue (of a monkey?) before being able to recognise monkeys?
The optimization process that trained the human brain is called evolution, and it took a lot more than 10,000 examples to produce a system that can differentiate cats vs dogs.
Put differently, an LLM is pre-trained with very light priors, starting almost from scratch, whereas a human brain is pre-loaded with extremely strong priors.