> In other words, you cheated. Those aren’t instructions you would give to a child.

No, but you are cheating by shifting the goal-posts like that.

You previously wrote:

> The fact that a child can do this an LLM cannot proves that the LLM lacks some general reasoning process which the child possesses.

I'm literally showing you an LLM doing what you said LLMs couldn't do, and which you used as your justification for claiming it "lacks some general reasoning process which the child possesses".

Well here it is, doing the thing.

Note that at no point here have I tried to claim that AI are fast learners here, or exactly like humans — we also don't give kids, as I said in another comment about rats, 50,000 years of subjective experience reading the internet to get here — but the best models definitely demonstrate the things you're saying they can't do.