GP's comment still stands: how many properties of the duck does a simulation need to exhibit before it can be considered an accurate simulation?

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck but isn't made of duck meat, you probably don't want to eat it.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck but doesn't have feathers, you probably don't stuff its skin covering in your pillows.

Not really trolling, unfortunately.

GP, in their parenthesis, made the insinuation that if it, which I would take as a LLM, talks like a human and makes up answers, like a LLM is wont to do, like a human is it human? >(if it talks like a human and makes up answers like a human, is it a human? ;)

While I don't subscribe to the idea that humans have a soul, or some other dualist take, I do think that there is far more to a human than just our cognitive properties. So to convince me that something is human takes more than just listing to it talk to me or make things up during the discussion.

So, too, with a duck. Sure, if all I have to go on is hearing a quack then I would say yeah that's most probably a duck.

Just like if you told me a barn was red when we say just one side, I'd say it's probably red.

I know, I know, I am fun at parties.