> Or am I reduced to buying an Apple TV device and unplugging the TV from the internet entirely ?

At least until TV makers wise up to that strategy and build a TV that requires internet access to unlock the HDMI port, that's the way to go.

It's likely that "knows" has no separate definition, but is used in some definition of "operator". If so, then "operator" should probably connect to "know", and "knows" shouldn't appear in the graph at all. But calling that edge case "broken" is a bit harsh, I think.

All of the examples on the linked page seem to be "good" outputs. Attribution sounds most useful to me in cases where an LLM produces the typical kind of garbage response: wrong information in the training data, hallucinations, sycophancy, over-eagerly pattern matching to unasked but similar, well-known questions. Can you give an example of a bad output, and show what the attribution tells us?

Then what precisely is the definition of complex? If "complex" just means "not designed", then the original quote that complex systems can't be designed is true but circular.

If the definition of "complex" is instead something more like "a system of services that interact", "prone to multiple, coincidental failures", then I don't think it's impossible to design them. It's just very hard. Manufacturing lines would be examples, they are certainly designed.

This is often quoted, but I wonder whether it's actually strictly true, at least if you keep to a reasonable definition of "works". It's certainly not true in mechanical engineering.