ok I don't care what people say, this would've helped me a lot during my PhD days fighting with LateX and diagrams. :)
Prism
301–310 of 543 posts
Re: Prism
#302Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm curious how it compares to Overleaf in terms of features? Putting aside the AI aspect entirely, I'm simply curious if this is a viable Overleaf competitor -- especially since it's free. I do self-host Overleaf which is annoying but ultimately doable if you don't want to pay the $21/mo (!). I do have to wonder for how long it will be free or even supported, though. On the one hand, remote LaTeX compiling gets expe…
Overleaf is a little curious to me. What's the point? Just install LaTeX. Claude is very good at manipulating LaTeX documents and I've found it effective at fixing up layouts for me.
Latex is such a nightmare to work with locally
Re: Prism
#303... aaaand now it's JATS.
Re: Prism
#304Do you think they used an em-dash in the opening sentence because they’re trying to normalise the AI’s writing style, or…
> because they’re trying to normalise the AI’s writing style, AIs use em dashes because competent writers have been using em dashes for a long time. I really hate the fact that we assume em dash == AI written. I've had to stop using em dashes because of it.
Likewise, I’m now reluctant to use any em dashes these days because unenlightened people immediately assume that it’s AI. I used em dashes way before AI decided these were cool
Re: Prism
#305Earlier quoted context omitted.
don't think so. I think latex was one of academics' earlier use cases of chatgpt, back in 2023. That's when I started noticing tables in every submitted paper looking way more sophisticated than they ever did. (The other early use case of course being grammar/spelling. Overnight everyone got fluent and typos disappeared.)
It's funny, I was reading a bunch of recent papers not long ago (I haven't been in academia in over a decade) and I was really impressed with the quality of the writing in most of them. I guess in some cases LLMs are the reason for that!
If you’ve got an existing paragraph written that you just know could be rephrased more eloquently, and can describe the type of rephrasing/restructuring you want… LLMs absolutely slap at that.
Re: Prism
#306Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've wasted hours of my life trying to get Latex to format my journal articles to different journals' specifications. That's tedious typesetting that wastes my time. I'm all for AI tools that help me produce my thoughts with as little friction as possible. I'm not in favor of letting AI do my thinking for me. Time will tell where Prism sits.
This Prism video was not just typesetting. If OpenAI released tools that just helped you typeset or create diagrams from written text, that would be fine. But it's not, it's writing papers for you. Scientists/publishers really do not need the onslaught of slop this will create. How can we even trust qualifications in the post-AI world, where cheating is rampant at univeristies?
Nah this is necessary.
Lessons are learned the hard way. I invite the slop - the more the merrier. It will lead to a reduction in internet activity as people puke from the slop. And then we chart our way back to the right path.
It is what it is. Humans.
Re: Prism
#307Previously, this existed as crixet.com [0]. At some point it used WASM for client-side compilation, and later transitioned to server-side rendering [1][2]. It now appears that there will be no option to disable AI [3]. I hope the core features remain available and won’t be artificially restricted. Compared to Overleaf, there were fewer service limitations: it was possible to compile more complex documents, share proj…
we did a podcast with the Crixet founder and Kevin Weil of OAI on the process: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2cBTVr8nxU&pp=2Aa0Bg%3D%3D
thanks for hosting us on the pod!
Re: Prism
#308I genuinely don’t see scientific journals and conferences continuing to last in this new world of autonomous agents, at least the same way that they used to be. As other top level posters have indicated the review portion of this is the limiting factor unless journal reviewers decide to utilize entirely automated review process, then they’re not gonna be able to keep up with what will increasingly be the most and bes…
"So whoever figures out the automated reviewer that can actually tell fact from fiction, is going to win this game."
Errr sure. Sounds easy when you write it down. I highly doubt such a thing will ever exist.
Re: Prism
#309I genuinely don’t see scientific journals and conferences continuing to last in this new world of autonomous agents, at least the same way that they used to be. As other top level posters have indicated the review portion of this is the limiting factor unless journal reviewers decide to utilize entirely automated review process, then they’re not gonna be able to keep up with what will increasingly be the most and bes…
If you think these types of tools are going to be generating "the most and best research coming out of any lab", then I have to assume you aren't actively doing any sort of research. LLMs are undeniably great for interactive discussion with content IF you actually are up-to-date with the historical context of a field, the current "state-of-the-art", and have, at least, a subjective opinion on the likely trajectories…
" then I have to assume you aren't actively doing any sort of research."
I would wager hes not - he seems to post with a lot of bluster and links to some paper he wrote (that nobody cares about).
Re: Prism
#310"Accelerating science writing and collaboration with AI" Uhm ... no. I think we need to put an end to AI as it is currently used (not all of it but most of it).
Yeah, there are already way more papers being published than we can reasonably read. Collaboration, ok, but we don’t need more writing.
It seems people dont understand the basics...
We dont need more stuff - we need more quality and less of the shit stuff.
Im convinced many involved in the production of LLM models are far too deep in the rabbit hole and cant see straight.