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

341–350 of 574 posts

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#341

Post by ixsploit »

shuwix wrote: post #328
ixsploit wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like to use them to generate me tutorial series for technical topics I want to learn or improve. So I start a prompt like this: > I want you to create a tutorial series about X for me. The prime objective is that I improve in topic X so never provide a solution but guide and teach. (for programming never write code). First create a question catalog to assess my current level. Then I would ask it to structure the tu…

I would love to see the "depth" of your knowledge in those topics. You literally proved the OP's point ... thinking you're learning. More like scratching the surface, with lots of invalid data while not being able to recognize what's invalid. It's like with latest vector of attacks being spamming Github with malware injected in proper looking code in hope of AI to index it. Then you paste the code because you don't u…

I really wonder where this assessment is coming from? It's not that I use LLM written code for something (in those exercises at least), in fact I don't let the LLM write code (see my prompt example).

It's about guiding me in _doing_ exercises so I learn and I can evaluate if I learned something if I can apply the learning myself.

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#342

Post by QuadmasterXLII »

abustamam wrote: post #338
matherial wrote: post #306

This is, without exaggeration, probably the fiftieth blog post or long-form comment about how someone is using an LLM for "complex learning", and I'd just really like to see at least one of these to be accompanied by a statement saying what are the kinds of problems the author can now confidently solve that they couldn't before. In my experience, LLMs are really good for taking up your time and making you feel like y…

> many of the popular educational videos on YouTube are fun to watch and don't really teach you anything. As a tangent, I think the concept of pop science has wasted so much time of what could be considered brilliant minds. I can't believe how much YouTube people I consider really smart consume under the guise of "learning stuff." And the videos are always designed to be addicting and to entice you to watch other of…

I do appreciate the literal college lectures on there. Hard to get the algorithm to surface them but they’re golden for learning. Of course I would be unshocked if the authenticity signals I’m tracking (AB.203 Lecture 3 video title, general hubbub and shuffling of chairs at start of video, university affiliated channel) are all faked by grifters 6 months from now.

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#343

Post by fluoridation »

daishi55 wrote: post #191
Terr_ wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Are there any reproducible hallucinations on any of the currently available OAI/Anthropic models? I’m not aware of any. And even if they are related - if Opus 4.8 always has a 1:100 chance of a specific hallucination - then running the same model twice does indeed dramatically reduce the odds of an error in the final output.

Even if your conditions are granted, different LLMs can easily consistently hold divergent "worldviews". LLM A might consistently state that fact P is true (i.e. it will never hallucinate a string that states or implies ¬P), while LLM B consistently states that fact ¬P is true. You don't have a way out of this with these two, and adding a third LLM is an additional confounding factor, not a solution. You can't settle questions of fact by survey, you need to test or use reliable sources.

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#344

Post by jack_pp »

eterm wrote: post #34
f311a wrote: post #21

What’s everyone’s opinion on learning new tech things in this day and age? My opinion swings between positive and depressing vision of the future. I still learn new stuff, but I’m afraid it won’t have any value in a year or so. For example, I’m pretty good at optimizing low level stuff, but right now you can just ask LLMs to do so and they are pretty good at it. They will profile the code and suggest reasonable optio…

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…

> 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.

https://code.ffmpeg.org/FFmpeg/FFmpeg/issues/23049

So there's this 11 year old issue in a forgotten ffmpeg plugin and I fixed it with deepseek by putting it into a self-testing loop. Probably would have taken me a few weeks to even understand the initial code to begin with. I haven't done C work in a long ass time and have zero knowledge of even what sub pixel sampling means.

With DS4 took me a few days and a couple of dollars. And by few days I mean I checked on it a few minutes every half hour or so a few times.

I don't understand the code it wrote but it's been in production for a while now and no issues so it's good. Ended up speeding up our video processing pipeline by 20-30%.

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#345

Post by Systemerror7A69 »

Terr_ wrote: post #169
daishi55 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's also relying on the assumption that the checking LLM only ever corrects wrong statements and never incorrectly "corrects" an already correct statement, which might not always be the case as well.

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#346

Post by fluoridation »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #340
fluoridation wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A programming language is a skill with an accessible source of irrefutable feedback. If the program doesn't work, then you did something wrong. What happens if you try to learn something less concrete or less testable, like quantum mechanics, as the GP suggested?

I agree with you. I'm also using AI to help me learn electronics so I can finally make some real stuff I can hold in my hands. Lots of hard engineering involved so I'm a lot less confident in my ability to spot the AI's own mistakes. However, saying you can't learn "anything" is just too strong. I'm definitely managing to distill the AI's weights into my own brain.

It's true in a very real sense, though. Without calibration, how can you tell whether you're learning something real or something fictitious? Imagine trying to learn a language from a single teacher, without ever talking to or corresponding with a native speaker. How could you tell whether you're actually learning the language, or the teacher's unique dialect? Yes, you indeed "learned" something, it's just something that might not bear much resemblance to the real thing.

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#347

Post by p0w3n3d »

TBH I was expecting something different. When I use LLM for learning I ask it to make questions for me. It's genius in these tasks. I moderate it to not kill me with difficulty but otherwise it's friendly to help me learn and understand

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#348

Post by miki123211 »

abustamam wrote: post #338
matherial wrote: post #306

This is, without exaggeration, probably the fiftieth blog post or long-form comment about how someone is using an LLM for "complex learning", and I'd just really like to see at least one of these to be accompanied by a statement saying what are the kinds of problems the author can now confidently solve that they couldn't before. In my experience, LLMs are really good for taking up your time and making you feel like y…

> many of the popular educational videos on YouTube are fun to watch and don't really teach you anything. As a tangent, I think the concept of pop science has wasted so much time of what could be considered brilliant minds. I can't believe how much YouTube people I consider really smart consume under the guise of "learning stuff." And the videos are always designed to be addicting and to entice you to watch other of…

I really like the term "edutainment" for this.

It's the kind of high-brow entertainment that makes you feel like you learn something.

For me, most "push" things are edutainment, whether that'd be Youtube videos or public-broadcaster television programs. Things you seek out yourself are not.

In a similar vein, there's "newstertainment" (news that makes you feel like it's important to watch, but actually changes nothing tangible about your life).

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#349

Post by fluoridation »

le-mark wrote: post #246
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sometimes get vague ideas for solving maths/science problems. They never pan out but i can talk in detail on group theory and advanced maths and science topics due to investigating such vague ideas over the years. These days the LLM shoots the ideas down instantly and honestly correctly, i know enough to know "yeah that's right, oh well" and move on. Which actually takes away a huge avenue of learning. I'm pretty t…

I felt this. I had a feeling for a long time that spider solitaire was somehow related to knot theory (legal moves being Reidemeister move equivalents and untangling). Llm shot this idea down very quickly! It was freeing actually.

Both of you are being overly dismissive of yourselves. Without either a proof or a program that proves the statement in question, I wouldn't trust the LLM. I wouldn't even trust if it produced citations, because I've already come across LLMs citing sources to back up statements without being able to find that information in the source (not saying it wasn't there, just that I was not able to find it).

Re: How I use LLMs to learn complex topics

#350

Post by yuanBuilds »

matherial wrote: post #306

This is, without exaggeration, probably the fiftieth blog post or long-form comment about how someone is using an LLM for "complex learning", and I'd just really like to see at least one of these to be accompanied by a statement saying what are the kinds of problems the author can now confidently solve that they couldn't before. In my experience, LLMs are really good for taking up your time and making you feel like y…

In reality, I would just ask LLM to give me a technical explanation of quantum physics, and ask any vocab and equation I do not understand in the response.
Post reply on HN