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

How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

laurentiugabriel.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 574 posts

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#161

Post by logicallee »

gb2d_hn wrote: post #80
copperx wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's much better to feed the book to the LLM and ask questions as you read along, instead of asking the LLM to basically write a custom book for you from scratch.

I came across the socratic method recently, and have used it to learn a couple of topics that I was having trouble getting to stick. There are some SKILL.md's available for it. It works for concepts as opposed to facts, and causes the model to guide you to answers through your own reasoning, which is both much more engaging than reading a wall of LLM text and helps the information stick.

what a time to be alive! "if you're having trouble understanding what your robot tutor is trying to teach you, you can ask it to guide you to the concepts using your own reasoning. This is both much more engaging than reading a wall of the robot's text and helps the information stick."

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#162

Post by [deleted] »

wxw wrote: post #31

> What you get is a beautiful animation that is 100% accurate and free of hallucinations. I'm not sure I follow how this is actually guaranteed? The fact-checking process mentioned just seems to involve asking AI to review its own work.

[deleted]

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#163

Post by imadierich »

8bitsout wrote: post #48

I thought LLMs were a great tool for learning new topics - perhaps even complex ones. But overtime, I have had several frustrations with this. First, I get exhausted reading LLM prose. I really don't want to read anything generated by something like Opus 5 at this point. Second, as I dive deeper, I need a way to organize the information in a useful way as I begin to branch out in many different directions. I have tri…

[dead]

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#164

Post by [deleted] »

daishi55 wrote: post #153
Gander5739 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the output can't be trusted, and you use another llm whose output can't be trusted to check the untrusted output of the first llm, then you're back where you started.

Not really. Take hallucinations for example. If they are 1 in 100 (actually they are much rarer, but for the sake of argument), then the chances that 2 LLMs or even just 2 runs of the same LLM have the same hallucination is, well, a lot less than 1 in 100.

[deleted]

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#165

Post by RunSet »

wonnage wrote: post #94
eterm wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're amazing at it, provided you keep asking the right questions. Trust me when I say that in the hands of someone who doesn't have your experience, the LLMs would not be getting the results you get. You might think what you're doing is trivial, it may be sessions that flow roughly, "Instrument this, okay this part is slow, profile this part, OK read the profile output and suggest a better approach". But your expe…

“asking the right questions” is built on years of experience doing the things now being offloaded to AI “asking the right questions” is also a moving target with each model release People simply underestimate the value of doing the work and think that the end result is all that matters

> “asking the right questions” is built on years of experience doing the things now being offloaded to AI

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/eat_one%27s_seed_corn#English

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#166

Post by DrewADesign »

tempacct2cmmnt wrote: post #74
wxw wrote: post #31

> What you get is a beautiful animation that is 100% accurate and free of hallucinations. I'm not sure I follow how this is actually guaranteed? The fact-checking process mentioned just seems to involve asking AI to review its own work.

Agreed. Given how many significant errors LLMs make in my topic of expertise, despite my taking multiple error checking steps, the idea of catching 100% of hallucinations because you told the LLM to check itself is hilarious. It’s just a wild lack of insight: “I’m using the LLM to teach me something I don’t know about, I definitely have the knowledge base to spot any errors that might remain!”

Yeah. People with technical and/or tech business bonafides claiming that AI granted them expertise are so often taken at face value when they really shouldn’t be. Who told them that they were proficient — a chatbot? Someone who knows even less about the topic, so any expertise seems impressive? I’ll bet it wasn’t someone that actually knew what they were talking about. Even some tech reporters are tripping over themselves to be amazed, but don’t bother checking if they should be.

People don’t even have to be lying to be wrong about this stuff. Someone can learn enough about a topic to be halfway up Mt. Stupid in no time flat, and in doing so, think they not only truly understand the topic at hand, but might be particularly adept because they were such quick studies. People that know less are impressed, because why wouldn’t they be? Anybody that knows more than them sounds like an expert. And people that know what they’re talking about cringe at the overconfidence, and probably try not to engage: who wants to have to prove that someone’s boundless confidence is entirely baseless? Most of the time, they think the actual expert is full of shit because they think they’re the expert. It’s incredible how many times I’ve had people in tech confidently, even smugly “explain” design concepts and strategies to me that they did not actually understand, knowing I was an experienced, degree-holding designer… and they didn’t even have a chatbot’s lips on their ass telling them how smart and insightful they were.

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#168

Post by cout »

8bitsout wrote: post #48

I thought LLMs were a great tool for learning new topics - perhaps even complex ones. But overtime, I have had several frustrations with this. First, I get exhausted reading LLM prose. I really don't want to read anything generated by something like Opus 5 at this point. Second, as I dive deeper, I need a way to organize the information in a useful way as I begin to branch out in many different directions. I have tri…

I use the LLM to point me at relevant books and papers. But there is still a trust problem: I am trusting the LLM to point me at reliable, trustworthy sources.

I'm not sure I'm better off with humans though -- I'm not qualified to judge whether a source is a proper authority, not an I qualified to judge whether someone knows enough to point me to a reliable source.

It seems this is a fundamental epistemological problem to which there may never be an answer.

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#169

Post by Terr_ »

daishi55 wrote: post #153
Gander5739 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the output can't be trusted, and you use another llm whose output can't be trusted to check the untrusted output of the first llm, then you're back where you started.

Not really. Take hallucinations for example. If they are 1 in 100 (actually they are much rarer, but for the sake of argument), then the chances that 2 LLMs or even just 2 runs of the same LLM have the same hallucination is, well, a lot less than 1 in 100.

That rests on a false-assumption that the errors are statistically independent events, and have nothing to do with the shared nature of the judges.

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#170

Post by intrasight »

gofreddygo wrote: post #148
copperx wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's much better to feed the book to the LLM and ask questions as you read along, instead of asking the LLM to basically write a custom book for you from scratch.

I have to agree with this. Completely relying on LLM for all your learning needs is a disaster. But being absolutely against use of LLMs isn't doing you any favors. This is where you don't have a formula but rely on you judgement and evidence of your having learnt something. For example having an LLM summarize a dense topic and to find books so that you can filter faster and spend time reading those books works way b…

Make it your goal to teach a room full of other humans that topic. I guarantee you will know that material cold. I've done lots of technical training in my career and after teaching a class two or three times I find myself to be very competent in the topic.

It's long been the case that the best way to learn something is to teach something.

Post reply on HN