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

Teaching LLMs how to solid model

willpatrick.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 115 posts

Re: Teaching LLMs how to solid model

#101

Post by xhkkffbf »

anthonyrstevens wrote: post #100
sharemywin wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you used for it to tell you that? what should I do with my camping stove if I want to avoid the rain ChatGPT said: If you want to avoid the rain while using your camping stove, here are your best options: Shelter Options: Use a Tarp: Set up a tarp high above your stove area with good airflow. Make sure it's not enclosed and water runs off away from you. Camp Kitchen Tent: Lightweight pop-up canopies…

I'm starting to think that many of the "But the AIs tell me I should drive my car off a cliff!!" posters are just making stuff up.

No! A friend of a friend asked an AI and the AI said they were real. Honest. But it was the other AIs. Not the one the friend asked.

Re: Teaching LLMs how to solid model

#102

Post by ben_w »

anthonyrstevens wrote: post #100
sharemywin wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you used for it to tell you that? what should I do with my camping stove if I want to avoid the rain ChatGPT said: If you want to avoid the rain while using your camping stove, here are your best options: Shelter Options: Use a Tarp: Set up a tarp high above your stove area with good airflow. Make sure it's not enclosed and water runs off away from you. Camp Kitchen Tent: Lightweight pop-up canopies…

I'm starting to think that many of the "But the AIs tell me I should drive my car off a cliff!!" posters are just making stuff up.

I've seen enough weird output from some models to not think quite so negatively about nay-sayers.

If "stupid response" happens 1% of the time, and the first attempt to use a model has four rounds of prompt-and-response, then I'd expect 1 in 25 people to anchor on them being extremely dumb and/or "just autocomplete on steroids" — the first time I tried a local model (IIRC it was Phi-2), I asked for a single page Tetris web app, which started off bad and half way in became a python machine learning script; the first time I used NotebookLM, I had it summarise one of my own blog posts and it missed half and made up clichés about half the rest.

And driving off, if not a cliff then a collapsed bridge, has gotten in the news even with AI of the Dijkstra era: https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/21/us/father-death-google-gp...

Re: Teaching LLMs how to solid model

#103

Post by ben_w »

wavefrontbakc wrote: post #91
ben_w wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the cost of mistakes is the major driving force behind where you can adopt tools like these. Generating a picture of a chair with five legs? No big deal. Generating supports for a bridge that'll collapse next week? Big problem Yes, indeed. But: Why can LLMs generally write code that even compiles? While I wouldn't trust current setups, there's no obvious reason why even a mere LLM cannot be used to explore…

>While I wouldn't trust current setups, there's no obvious reason why even a mere LLM cannot be used to explore the design space when the output can be simulated to test its suitability as a solution Having to test every assertation sounds like a not particularly useful application, and the more variables there are the more it seems to be about throwing completely random things at the wall and hoping it works You sho…

> Having to test every assertation sounds like a not particularly useful application, and the more variables there are the more it seems to be about throwing completely random things at the wall and hoping it works

That should be fully automated.

Instead of anchoring on "how do I test what ChatGPT gives me?", think "Pretend I'm Ansys Inc.*, how would I build a platform that combines an LLM to figure out what to make in the first place from a user request, with all our existing suite of simulation systems, to design a product that not only actually meets the requirements of that user request, but also actually proves it will meet those requirements?"

* Real company which does real sim software

Re: Teaching LLMs how to solid model

#104

Post by ben_w »

aredox wrote: post #95
ben_w wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the cost of mistakes is the major driving force behind where you can adopt tools like these. Generating a picture of a chair with five legs? No big deal. Generating supports for a bridge that'll collapse next week? Big problem Yes, indeed. But: Why can LLMs generally write code that even compiles? While I wouldn't trust current setups, there's no obvious reason why even a mere LLM cannot be used to explore…

>Saying "just text prediction" understates how big a deal that is. Here on HN we often see posts insisting on the importance of "first principles". Your embrace of "magic" - an unknown black box who does seemingly wonderful things that usually blow up to one's face and have a hidden cost - is the opposite of that. LLMs are just text prediction. That's what they are. >Why can LLMs generally write code that even compil…

> Why can I copy-paste code and it compiles?

I think phrasing it like that is called "begging the question": you've already skipped past all the intelligence you had to apply to figure out which part of the entire internet constituted "code".

And not just any code, but code in correct language. If I copy-paste C64 Basic into the middle of a .swift file (and not as a string), it isn't going to compile.

And not just in the correct language, but a complete block of it, rather than a fragment.

> even Microsoft's own LLM.

"even" suggests you hold them in higher regard than I do.

Re: Teaching LLMs how to solid model

#106

Post by bdcravens »

Most of the 3D printing model repositories offer financial incentives for model creators, as they are usually owned by manufacturers who want to own as much of the ecosystem as possible. (Makerworld, Printables, etc)

Widespread AI generation obviously enables abuse of those incentives, so it'll be interesting to see how they adjust to this. (It's already a small problem, with modelers using AI renderings that are deceptive in terms of quality)

Re: Teaching LLMs how to solid model

#107

Post by cdecl »

aredox wrote: post #95
ben_w wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the cost of mistakes is the major driving force behind where you can adopt tools like these. Generating a picture of a chair with five legs? No big deal. Generating supports for a bridge that'll collapse next week? Big problem Yes, indeed. But: Why can LLMs generally write code that even compiles? While I wouldn't trust current setups, there's no obvious reason why even a mere LLM cannot be used to explore…

>Saying "just text prediction" understates how big a deal that is. Here on HN we often see posts insisting on the importance of "first principles". Your embrace of "magic" - an unknown black box who does seemingly wonderful things that usually blow up to one's face and have a hidden cost - is the opposite of that. LLMs are just text prediction. That's what they are. >Why can LLMs generally write code that even compil…

> LLMs are just text prediction. That's what they are.

This sort of glib talking point really doesn't pass muster, because if you showed the current state of affairs to a random developer from 2015, you would absolutely blow their damned socks off.

Re: Teaching LLMs how to solid model

#108

Post by cdecl »

wavefrontbakc wrote: post #85
Nevermark wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mostly the main limitation with LLMs is the imagination of the person using it. Ask the right questions and they get a lot more useful. Completely agree. We get waves of comments on HN downplaying model abilities or their value. Many people don’t seem to explore and experiment with them enough. I have 3 screens. The left one has two models on it. The right one has a model & a web browser for quick searches. I work…

I've only found useful answers for when I've begun something from completely zero. Things I've got even a reasonable grasp on I start to spot large dangerous holes a model very confidently claims is the right solution. Stuff like bringing camping stove inside a tent to avoid rainy weather, nevermind it being suicide at the same time. >I web search maybe 10% of what I did six months ago. Me too, though this is more dr…

The problem I have with this conclusion is that "trust but verify" long predates AI models. People can, and have been, posting total bullshit on the internet since time immemorial. You have never _not_ needed to actually validate the things you are reading.

Re: Teaching LLMs how to solid model

#109

Post by mattegan »

While this all is super cool, and I don't want to downplay TFAs efforts - I'm kind of at my wit's end here. You've gotten me at a bad time.

I use a computer every day to do electrical (and sometimes, poorly) mechanical CAD. Getting frustrated with/at software is a daily occurrence, but CAD software is some of the worst.

Egg on my face, maybe, but for MCAD I use Fusion360. It's constantly bugging out - and I'm not even talking about the actual modeling workflow or tools! I'll get windows disappearing and floating above other windows. It won't work if you don't install updates within a few days of their release. If I go offline it pops banners in my face. Sometimes, duplicate copies of itself open up, presumably because the updater put a new binary somewhere on my machine that spotlight indexed while I had the previous version running... Sometimes you can't delete files in the cloud because they're referenced by... other deleted files?? A few weeks ago I installed an update like a good boy, and it literally broke the functionality of _being able to click on things_ in the model tree.

On the ECAD side, I use KiCAD for most personal/professional projects these days - very, very few complaints there, actually. However, a new client is using Altium, so here we go... My primary machine is a M3 Max MBP, and I know it's running through the ARM translation layer inside Parallels, but Altium was completely unusable! Opening the component library or moving the explorer window took multiple seconds.

I dusted off an X1 Carbon, which admittedly is 6-ish years old, but it was even worse there! You must understand, for schematic editing, this software's primary use is to drag rectangles around and connect them with lines. How difficult can this be? I had to get a new Windows machine just to be able to navigate around Altium without constant stuttering. Honestly, even on this new machine it's still slower than I'd like. This software is upwards of $5k a year for a single seat license! [1]

I grew up using Macromedia Studio 8, which I installed from a box of CDs, watching my father use his Pentium 4 machine to make complex block diagrams in Visio 2002. In the mid 2000s he was laying out PCBs in PADS without any issues on a laptop! Now a single tab of Lucidchart takes more memory than my old PC could even address, I can't resize the godforsaken library viewer window in Altium on a machine with 16 cores, and if I want to change the settings on my mouse I have to sit through Logitech asking me if I want to log in and join the mouse community to share usage tips? What the hell is going on!?

So, forgive me, and not to go full Casey Muratori, but when I see companies like AdamCAD trying to push this new paradigm, I just can't handle it. Can we please, please, please, just go back to making decent software that enables me to do my work without constant hassle? I don't give a single damn about the AI features if I can't count on the software opening and being usable day in and day out. I lose actual time each and every week to dealing with software issues and I'm so so over it.

[1] $5k for a single site license, of which to attain, you'll have to sit in a sales meeting for a half hour, during which the sales rep tells you that - technically the EULA establishes a 0.5 mile radius for your "single site" but - don't worry - using it at home 3.5 miles away is totally okay, he's not going to make you buy two $5k licenses - thank god!

Re: Teaching LLMs how to solid model

#110

Post by mediaman »

esperent wrote: post #69
mediaman wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that this isn't very useful except for the very earliest ideation stages of industrial design, which hardly need CAD anyway. Most parts need to fit with something else, usually some set of components. Then there are considerations around draft, moldability, size of core pins, sliders, direction of ejection, wall thickness, coring out, radii, ribs for stiffness, tolerances... LLMs seem far off from bein…

You may or may not be right, but your arguments sound like echos of what software developers were saying four or five years ago. And four or five years ago, they were right. Don't dismiss an AI tool just because the first iterations aren't useful, it'll be iterated on faster than you can believe possible.

I've created (small, toy) transformers and also modeled injection molded parts in Solidworks.

There is a really big difference. It's obvious how programming languages can use tokens for an attention mechanism, which gives them excellent ability to have parallelized performance (versus RNNs, the prior way of relating tokens) with much broader ability to maintain coherence.

I don't know the parallel with brep. What are the tokens here? It's a fundamental architectural question.

But unlike four or five years ago for programming, when the attention mechanism was clear with transformers and the answer was, basically, just "scale it up", we don't even really know where to begin here. So assuming some magic is going to happen is optimistic.

It'd be exciting if we could figure it out. Maybe the answer is that we do away with brep and all tree based systems entirely (though I'm a little unclear how we maintain the mathematical precision of brep, especially with curves, which is necessary for machining -- your machinist is going to throw you out if you start giving them meshes, at least for precision work that has anything with a radius).

Post reply on HN