Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Struggling to Understand DHTs – Any Good Resources?

news.ycombinator.com

21–22 of 22 posts

Re: Ask HN: Struggling to Understand DHTs – Any Good Resources?

#21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's getting down-voted because it is a very bad advice, one that can be refuted by already known facts. Your comment is even worse in this regards and is very misleading - the LLMs are definitely not going to "accurately explain everything you need to know ", it's not a magical tool that "knows everything", it's a statistical parrot which infers the most likely sequence of tokens, which results in inaccurate respons…

You left out the "for common algorithms like this" part of my comment. None of what you said applies to learning simple, well-established algorithms for software development. If it's history, biology, economics etc. then sure, be wary of LLM inaccuracies, but an algorithm is not something you can get wrong. I don't personally know much about DHTs so I'll just use sorting as an example: If an LLM exlains how a sorting…

I meant it also for the (unwittingly) left-out part of your comment. Firstly, by saying this parrot will explain "everything that you need to know ..." you're pushing your own standards onto everyone else. Maybe the OP really wants to understand it deeply and learn about edge cases, and understand how it really works. I dont think I would rely on a statistical parrot (yes, that's really how they work, only on a large scale) to teach me stuff like that. At best, they are to be used with railguards as some kind of a personal version of "rain man", with the exception that the "rain man" was not hallucinating when counting cards :)

Re: Ask HN: Struggling to Understand DHTs – Any Good Resources?

#22
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's getting downvoted because it's the equivalent of saying "google it".

And because LLMs will "explain" things that contain outright hallucinations - a beginner won't know which parts are real and which parts are suspect.

Exactly this. The thing which irritates and worries me, is that I notice a lot of junior folks tend to try and apply these machines in solving open-ended problems the machines don't have the context for. The lawsuits with made-up referent cases are just the beginning I am afraid, we're in for a lot more slop endangering our services and tools.
Post reply on HN