The strength is dealing with ill-defined problems.
This last point is what makes it feel like magic, but the first two are the ones that can lead to disillusion.
The statistical approach only works if we can get computation cheap enough, sufficient data and if the problem can tolerate "good enough" results.
Am I the only ignoramus who did not know the above? Until now I indeed thought that the lack of persistence in the world was indeed "fixed" in newer video models by some sort of "remember the objects you just displayed"/"remember the objects behind the camera" code/storage.
>Baudrillard had a word for this, back when the most advanced simulation available was Disneyland. A simulacrum: a copy with no original. The 2 in that cell is not a copy of a computation. There was never a computation to copy. It is a symbol that refers to nothing except what a 2 usually looks like in that position, and it happens to be right.
We've all heard the saying "fake it 'til you make it".
We're now approaching the point where the "fake" is more real than "reality".