I haven't yet read a convincing take on why "stochastic parrot" would *not* be an accurate description.
Most of what I have read falls in the realm of magical thinking: that any sufficiently complex stochastic model is indistinguishable from real intelligence, and therefore MUST be more than the sum of its parts. Unfortunately, there is never a good reason given why this MUST be the case.
I do not mind losing credibility with people who cling ...