> The distinction is meaningless IMO.
Not when discussing whether it's an LLM. The second L in LLM does have a meaning.
I'd argue that meaningful sequences of symbols constitute a language. This example doesn't use a human language but it does use a language IMO (at least AFAIU).
[flagged]
alt Hacker News
I'd argue that meaningful sequences of symbols constitute a language. This example doesn't use a human language but it does use a language IMO (at least AFAIU).