[ExI] Claude for president?

[Adrian Tymes]

On Sun, Mar 15, 2026 at 3:40 PM Jason Resch via extropy-chat
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2026, 3:15 PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 15, 2026 at 2:38 PM Jason Resch via extropy-chat
>> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Mar 15, 2026, 12:49 PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> >> LLMs are complex enough that, even with the controls as you say, it
>> >> seems likely that two people - or even the same person - running the
>> >> exact same non-trivial query two times would often enough get
>> >> non-identical answers.
>> >
>> > It seems that way, but LLMs are themselves fully deterministic. So long as the exact same input and context are provided, their output is the same. In practice, however, the tokens a LLM deterministically predicts as most likely are then randomly selected by a higher level process to make the writing more dynamic. This is driven by the "heat" parameter. But by using a pseudorandom selection with the same seed, identical output can be ensured.
>>
>> This is true in the sense that the universe may be fully
>> deterministic: technically true (possibly) but unreproducible in
>> practice (given the complexity and number of inputs of a LLM worth
>> advising the President of the United States) due to the very high
>> number of variables.
>
> You needn't invoke the determinism of the universe here. The context window is the input. The output is the input followed by a series of matrix multiplications. Each multiplication is deterministic. The result is defined entirely by the input and the series of multiplications.
>
> It may be a complex calculation involving a large variable, but nevertheless it is a fully deterministic and repeatable one.

If you had the exact same inputs, the exact same trainings, the exact
same contexts, et cetera.

Which you won't, in practice.  Not for anything this complex.