The question of whether there is a national drink seems to me to be entirely different than the question you asked the LLM "Prompt: In the Netherlands, in terms of drinks, is there a particular spirit that represents the country?"
The question in the prompt comes off to me as a sort of qualitative determination rather than asking about pure factual information (is there an officially designated spirit). As such I don't think it can necessarily be right or wrong.
Anyway, I'm not sure what you'd expect. In terms of acquisition of knowledge, LLMs fundamentally rely on a written corpus. Their knowledge of information that is passed through casual spoken conversation is limited. Sure, as human beings, we rely a great deal on the latter. But for an LLM to lack access to that information means that it's going to miss out on cultural nuances that are not widely expressed in writing. Much in the same way that a human adult can live in a foreign country for decades, speaking their adopted language quite fluently, but if they don't have kids of their own, they might be quite ignorant of that country's nursery rhymes and children's games, simply because they were never part of their acquired vocabulary and experience.
I was just proving the people wrong that were saying akin to that o1 was "oneshotting every question".
I completely understand from how LLMs work that they wouldn't be able to get this right. But then people shouldn't be proudly be pronouncing that o1 (or any model) is getting every question right, first time.
My conjecture is that you still haven't proven that it didn't get the answer "right"
I have opened the question of why you thought jenever was not jenever, and your non-responsiveness I think compels the fact that AI was more correct in your contrived instance.
If you add pear and spices to vodka, we call it liqueur and not pear-flavored vodka. So no, you are wrong. And the AI is wrong. But that is okay, if you want to enjoy leaning into the hype that's your choice.
The question in the prompt comes off to me as a sort of qualitative determination rather than asking about pure factual information (is there an officially designated spirit). As such I don't think it can necessarily be right or wrong.
Anyway, I'm not sure what you'd expect. In terms of acquisition of knowledge, LLMs fundamentally rely on a written corpus. Their knowledge of information that is passed through casual spoken conversation is limited. Sure, as human beings, we rely a great deal on the latter. But for an LLM to lack access to that information means that it's going to miss out on cultural nuances that are not widely expressed in writing. Much in the same way that a human adult can live in a foreign country for decades, speaking their adopted language quite fluently, but if they don't have kids of their own, they might be quite ignorant of that country's nursery rhymes and children's games, simply because they were never part of their acquired vocabulary and experience.