Yeah, I said that badly. It isn’t precisely the lack of expressiveness that bugs me. You’re 100% right about the equivalencies.
Instead, it’s that the grammar for OR is built into the system at a deep level; that the goal-attention module has separate copies of itself getting as input however many As, Bs, amd Cs are in “A or B or C”.
Like—it makes sense to think of the agent as receiving the goals, given how they’ve set it up. But it doesn’t make sense to think of the agent as receiving the goals in language, because language implies a greater disconnect between mental modules and words than it’s set up to have. Which again, isn’t so much a problem with the paper as it is an easy over-estimation of the paper’s accomplishments.
Yeah, I said that badly. It isn’t precisely the lack of expressiveness that bugs me. You’re 100% right about the equivalencies.
Instead, it’s that the grammar for OR is built into the system at a deep level; that the goal-attention module has separate copies of itself getting as input however many As, Bs, amd Cs are in “A or B or C”.
Like—it makes sense to think of the agent as receiving the goals, given how they’ve set it up. But it doesn’t make sense to think of the agent as receiving the goals in language, because language implies a greater disconnect between mental modules and words than it’s set up to have. Which again, isn’t so much a problem with the paper as it is an easy over-estimation of the paper’s accomplishments.