Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because old laptop that can’t run a local LLM in reasonable time.
Most people who can nag about old laptops on HN can just afford newer one but are cheap as Scrooge Mcduck.
FYI: non-Western countries exist.
Local LLMs versus offline Wikipedia
11–20 of 200 posts
Re: Local LLMs versus offline Wikipedia
#12Wikipedia-snapshots without the most important meta layers, i. e. a) the article's discussion pages and related archives, as well as b) the version history, would be useless to me as critical contexts might be/are missing... especially with regards to LLM-augmented text analysis. Even when just focusing on the standout-lemmata.
I’m a massive Wikipedia fan, have a lot of it downloaded locally on my phone, binge read it before bed, etc. Even so, I rarely go through talk pages or version history unless I’m contributing something. What would you see in an article that motivates you to check out the meta layers?
Re: Local LLMs versus offline Wikipedia
#13Wikipedia-snapshots without the most important meta layers, i. e. a) the article's discussion pages and related archives, as well as b) the version history, would be useless to me as critical contexts might be/are missing... especially with regards to LLM-augmented text analysis. Even when just focusing on the standout-lemmata.
I’m a massive Wikipedia fan, have a lot of it downloaded locally on my phone, binge read it before bed, etc. Even so, I rarely go through talk pages or version history unless I’m contributing something. What would you see in an article that motivates you to check out the meta layers?
Try any article on a controversial issue.
Re: Local LLMs versus offline Wikipedia
#14One important distinction is that the strength of LLMs isn't just in storing or retrieving knowledge like Wikipedia, it’s in comprehension. LLMs will return faulty or imprecise information at times, but what they can do is understand vague or poorly formed questions and help guide a user toward an answer. They can explain complex ideas in simpler terms, adapt responses based on the user's level of understanding, and…
In a 'rebooting society' doomsday scenario you're assuming that our language and understanding would persist. An LLM would essentially be a blackbox that you cannot understand or decipher, and would be doubly prone to hallucinations and issues when interacting with it using a language it was not trained on. Wikipedia is something you could gradually untangle, especially if the downloaded version also contained associated images.
Re: Local LLMs versus offline Wikipedia
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most people who can nag about old laptops on HN can just afford newer one but are cheap as Scrooge Mcduck.
FYI: non-Western countries exist.
Eh, even just “countries that are not the US” would be a correct statement. US tech salaries are just in an entire different ballpark to what most companies outside the US can offer. I’m in Canada, I make good money (as far as Canadian salaries go), but nowhere near “buy an expensive laptop whenever” money.
Re: Local LLMs versus offline Wikipedia
#16Wikipedia-snapshots without the most important meta layers, i. e. a) the article's discussion pages and related archives, as well as b) the version history, would be useless to me as critical contexts might be/are missing... especially with regards to LLM-augmented text analysis. Even when just focusing on the standout-lemmata.
I’m a massive Wikipedia fan, have a lot of it downloaded locally on my phone, binge read it before bed, etc. Even so, I rarely go through talk pages or version history unless I’m contributing something. What would you see in an article that motivates you to check out the meta layers?
Any article with social or political controversy ... Try gamergate. Or any of the presidents pages for since at least bush lol
Re: Local LLMs versus offline Wikipedia
#17One important distinction is that the strength of LLMs isn't just in storing or retrieving knowledge like Wikipedia, it’s in comprehension. LLMs will return faulty or imprecise information at times, but what they can do is understand vague or poorly formed questions and help guide a user toward an answer. They can explain complex ideas in simpler terms, adapt responses based on the user's level of understanding, and…
An unreliable computer treated as a god by a pre-information-age society sounds like a Star Trek episode.
hey generally everything worked pretty good in those societies, it was only people who didn't fit in who had a brief painful headache and then died!
Re: Local LLMs versus offline Wikipedia
#18One important distinction is that the strength of LLMs isn't just in storing or retrieving knowledge like Wikipedia, it’s in comprehension. LLMs will return faulty or imprecise information at times, but what they can do is understand vague or poorly formed questions and help guide a user toward an answer. They can explain complex ideas in simpler terms, adapt responses based on the user's level of understanding, and…
which means you'd still want wikipedia, as the impercision will get in the way of real progress beyond the basics.
Re: Local LLMs versus offline Wikipedia
#19This is a sensible comparison. My "help reboot society with the help of my little USB stick" thing was a throwaway remark to the journalist at a random point in the interview, I didn't anticipate them using it in the article! https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/07/17/1120391/how-to-r... A bunch of people have pointed out that downloading Wikipedia itself onto a USB stick is sensible, and I agree with them. Wikipedi…
the real valuable would be both of them. the LLM is good for refining/interpreting questions or longer form progress issues, and the wiki would be actual information for each component of whatever you're trying to do.
But neither are sufficient for modern technology beyond pointing to a starting point.
Re: Local LLMs versus offline Wikipedia
#20One important distinction is that the strength of LLMs isn't just in storing or retrieving knowledge like Wikipedia, it’s in comprehension. LLMs will return faulty or imprecise information at times, but what they can do is understand vague or poorly formed questions and help guide a user toward an answer. They can explain complex ideas in simpler terms, adapt responses based on the user's level of understanding, and…
In a 'rebooting society' doomsday scenario you're assuming that our language and understanding would persist. An LLM would essentially be a blackbox that you cannot understand or decipher, and would be doubly prone to hallucinations and issues when interacting with it using a language it was not trained on. Wikipedia is something you could gradually untangle, especially if the downloaded version also contained associ…
I would not subscribe to your certainty. With LLMs, even empty or nonsensical prompts yield answers, however faulty they may be. Based on its level of comprehension and ability to generalize between languages I would not be too surprised to see LLMs being able to communicate on a very superficial level in a language not part of the training data. Furthermore, the compression ratio seems to be much better with LLMs compared to Wikipedia, considering the generality of questions one can pose to e.g. Qwen that Wikipedia cannot answer even when knowing how to navigate the site properly. It could also come down to the classic dichotomy between symbolic expert systems and connectionist neural networks which has historically and empirically been decisively won by the latter.