LLMs predict the next token in a sequence. The brain's cortex may function as a general prediction engine capable of "omnidirectional inference"—predicting any missing information from any available subset of inputs, not just what comes next. This offers a more flexible and powerful form of reasoning.

The brain's hardware limitations, like slow and stochastic neurons, may actually be advantages. These properties seem perfectly suited for probabilistic inference algorithms that rely on sampling—a task that requires explicit, computationally-intensive random number generation in digital systems. Hardware and algorithm are likely co-designed.

Reinforcement learning incentivizes AIs to find the right answer, not just mimic human text. This leads to them developing their own internal "dialect" for reasoning—a chain of thought that is effective but increasingly incomprehensible and alien to human observers.

Unlike simple classification (one pass), generative AI performs recursive inference. Each new token (word, pixel) requires a full pass through the model, turning a single prompt into a series of demanding computations. This makes inference a major, ongoing driver of GPU demand, rivaling training.

Even with vast training data, current AI models are far less sample-efficient than humans. This limits their ability to adapt and learn new skills on the fly. They resemble a perpetual new hire who can access information but lacks the deep, instinctual learning that comes from experience and weight updates.

AI intelligence shouldn't be measured with a single metric like IQ. AIs exhibit "jagged intelligence," being superhuman in specific domains (e.g., mastering 200 languages) while simultaneously lacking basic capabilities like long-term planning, making them fundamentally unlike human minds.

An LLM shouldn't do math internally any more than a human would. The most intelligent AI systems will be those that know when to call specialized, reliable tools—like a Python interpreter or a search API—instead of attempting to internalize every capability from first principles.

Current AI models resemble a student who grinds 10,000 hours on a narrow task. They achieve superhuman performance on benchmarks but lack the broad, adaptable intelligence of someone with less specific training but better general reasoning. This explains the gap between eval scores and real-world utility.

AI models use simple, mathematically clean loss functions. The human brain's superior learning efficiency might stem from evolution hard-coding numerous, complex, and context-specific loss functions that activate at different developmental stages, creating a sophisticated learning curriculum.