Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 214 posts

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#191

Post by RobRivera »

simianwords wrote: post #152
bigfishrunning wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Domain specific LLM's absolutely exist, don't assume i've never seen one. You seem very misinformed on what is "literally not possible". https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/domain-specific-llm

there are close to zero domain specific models that beat frontier SOTA models even in their own domain. (other than few edge cases like token extraction) why do you think that's the case? lets start from here. the real answer is that you get benefits from having data from many sources that add up expontentially for intelligence. > LLMs are pattern matchers but lets try to falsify this. can you come up with a prompt t…

What do you do for work?

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#192

Post by RobRivera »

kenjackson wrote: post #114
RobRivera wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its obvious to me. Its obvious to you. It isnt obvious to the person I am responding to, and it isnt obvious to majority of individuals I speak with on the matter (which is why AI, personally, is in the bucket of religion amd politics for polite conversation to simply avoid)

Wait -- I'm fairly certain this is obvious to the person you were responding to. It may not be obvious to a lay person (who may not even know LLMs are trained at all). But I think this is obvious to almost all people with even a small understanding of LLMs.

I'm actually pretty convinced they're a troll or at the very least a high confrontation participant who is quick to move goal posts, ignore entire chains of logic, engage in ad hominim attacks of other posters, and is bringing zero novel insight anywhere in this thread

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#193

Post by simianwords »

RobRivera wrote: post #192
kenjackson wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait -- I'm fairly certain this is obvious to the person you were responding to. It may not be obvious to a lay person (who may not even know LLMs are trained at all). But I think this is obvious to almost all people with even a small understanding of LLMs.

I'm actually pretty convinced they're a troll or at the very least a high confrontation participant who is quick to move goal posts, ignore entire chains of logic, engage in ad hominim attacks of other posters, and is bringing zero novel insight anywhere in this thread

one of the posters said it can't even reason through chess, i ran the actual benchmark, spent money and actually proved that it can beat a 1000 elo chess engine.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47316787

does this show i'm a troll? throughout this thread there has been misinformation that i have been dispelling.

what you are doing is ad hominem.

here's another post where i ran the prompt that the person asked which would apparently show that LLM's can't reason

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47316855

have you considered that you might be misinformed so what i say might look like trolling?

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#194

Post by simianwords »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #187
simianwords wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how would you empirically disprove that it doesn't have understanding? i can prove that it does have understanding because it behaves exactly like a human with understanding does. if i ask it to solve an integral and ask it questions about it - it replies exactly as if it has understood. give me a specific example so that we can stress test this argument. for example: what if we come up with a new board game with a c…

> how would you empirically disprove that it doesn't have understanding? The complete failure of Claude to play Pokemon, something a small child can do with zero prior instruction. The "how many r's are in strawberry" question. The "should I drive or walk to the car wash" question. The fact that right now, today all models are very frequently turning out code that uses APIs that don't exist, syntax that doesn't exist…

> The complete failure of Claude to play Pokemon, something a small child can do with zero prior instruction

cherry picking because gemini and gpt have beat it. claude doesn't have a good vision set up

> The "how many r's are in strawberry" question

it could do this since 2024

> The "should I drive or walk to the car wash" question

the SOTA models get it right with reasoning

> fact that right now, today all models are very frequently turning out code that uses APIs that don't exist, syntax that doesn't exist, or basic logic failures.

not when you use a harness. even humans can't write code that works in first attempt.

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#195

Post by jacquesm »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #190
jacquesm wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. I'm 60+ and I think I'm past saving, but I appreciate your effort to tone police HN. As well as your own exemplary behavior: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46653114 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45505708 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45334298 And probably others besides.

[flagged]

Hi Vlad,

Turnabout is fair play, you should know that by now. You seem to have the idea up your bonnet that you are in a position to lecture, that sort of thing is best done from a position of maturity. Your incessant attacks are far more against the spirit of HN than anything that I've written in this thread.

Your criticism does not take into account anything beyond the first layer of what I've written and does not apply leeway for cultural or other differences, which you seem to want to flatten to 'whatever Vlad says' being the norm.

Your intolerance is the problem here, not my writing. I asked you because I wanted you to have a chance to clarify your view before criticizing you because that's only fair. It could well be that you had an actual reason besides having long toes.

I don't like to be lectured by those that have ethics issues themselves on ethics and I don't like to be lectured on the tone of my writing by those that have issues themselves with the tone of their own writing.

For someone who has been here for as long as you have I'd expect a more balanced view on the contributors to HN and a much better contribution:flagged comments ratio than you seem to rack up.

If you really want to improve the tone on HN by reducing hostility, snark, unprofessionalism and now personal attacks then I suggest you seek out a mirror. Your own behavior in this thread shows examples of all of those and you are neither a credit to yourself or your employer.

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#196

Post by simianwords »

RobRivera wrote: post #191
simianwords wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there are close to zero domain specific models that beat frontier SOTA models even in their own domain. (other than few edge cases like token extraction) why do you think that's the case? lets start from here. the real answer is that you get benefits from having data from many sources that add up expontentially for intelligence. > LLMs are pattern matchers but lets try to falsify this. can you come up with a prompt t…

What do you do for work?

lets keep it focused on the discussion - in a previous thread you called me a troll.

start with a way to falsify that it can't reason.

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#197

Post by [deleted] »

jacquesm wrote: post #195
mynameisvlad wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Hi Vlad, Turnabout is fair play, you should know that by now. You seem to have the idea up your bonnet that you are in a position to lecture, that sort of thing is best done from a position of maturity. Your incessant attacks are far more against the spirit of HN than anything that I've written in this thread. Your criticism does not take into account anything beyond the first layer of what I've written and does not…

[deleted]

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#198

Post by Planktonne »

simianwords wrote: post #131
elmomle wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's take the work of Raymond Carver as just one example. He would type drafts which would go through repeated iteration with a massive amount of hand-written markup, revision and excision by his editor. To really recreate his writing style, you would need the notes he started with for himself, the drafts that never even made it to his editor, the drafts that did make to the editor, all the edits made, and the final…

Can a human replicate style without understanding process? Yes we can. We do it all the time with Shakespeare. Why not LLMs? I can do it at the moment with Shakespeare an LLMs.

Mimicking the style of Shakespeare does not produce anything close to work with the quality of Shakespeare.

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#199

Post by Planktonne »

TimorousBestie wrote: post #43
simianwords wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i don't buy this logic. if i have studied an author greatly i will be able to recognise patterns and be able to write like them. ex: i read a lot of shakespeare, understand patterns, understand where he came from, his biography and i will be able to write like him. why is it different for an LLM? i again don't get what the point is?

This is the plot of a short story of Borges’ called “Pierre Menard, the Author of Don Quixote.”

There's a relatively common pattern of "new tech idea => Borges already explained why that approach is conceptually flawed".

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#200

Post by AlexeyBelov »

jacquesm wrote: post #171
Rebelgecko wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funnily enough FB already has the patent for this: using LLMs for "simulating the user when the user is absent from the social networking system, for example... if the user is deceased."

Oh, so they're not even hiding it. What is wrong with these people not to realize that this is way across the line?

The only relevant line for them is when they are "lining" their pockets.
Post reply on HN