We do not need to discuss all dystopic X posts about LLMs.
Whenever Nature Mag, however, publishes nonsense like “A foundation model to predict and capture human cognition” this may deserve a comment…
Fortunately Science’s Cathleen O’Grady already commented
“I think there’s going to be a big portion of the scientific community that will view this paper very skeptically and be very harsh on it” says Blake Richards, a computational neuroscientist at McGill University … Jeffrey Bowers, a cognitive scientist at the University of Bristol, thinks the model is “absurd”. He and his colleagues tested Centaur … and found decidedly un-humanlike behavior.”
The claim is absurd as training set of 160 psych studies was way to small to cover even a minor aspect of human behavior.
And well, a large fraction of the 160 published study findings are probably wrong as may be assumed from another replications study in psych field
Ninety-seven percent of original studies had significant results … Thirty-six percent of replications had significant results.