Because certain aspects (both are error prone) are similar and comparable. The notion that two entities need to be close in abilities for it to be possible to compare them is nonsense.
You make the point for me: We managed to put men on the moon despite humans being enormously unreliable and error prone, because we built system around them that allowed for harnessing the good bits and reducing the failures to acceptable levels.
We are - I am anyway - using our lessons from building reliable systems from unreliable elements to raise the reliability of outputs of LLMs the same way.
> We are - I am anyway - using our lessons from building reliable systems from unreliable elements to raise the reliability of outputs of LLMs the same way.
:) :) :) I could tell immediately you are somehow vested in the "success" of the LLM. So 600 B dollars and five years later, can you tell me how far did you guys get? Apollo programme costed a tiny fraction of that and started putting people on the moon some ~10 years later. Would you say that you are on the way to accomplish something similar in the next five years?
