91–100 of 107 posts
If possible in the context, the way to go is to ask for a piece of code processing the data to provide exhaustivity. This method have at least some chance to succeed.
> "Something that describes how an AI is convincing if you don't understand its reasoning, and close to useless if you understand its limitations." This made me laugh. Because it's the exact opposite sentiment of anti-LLM crowd. So which is it? Is it only useful if you know what you're doing or less useful if you know what you're doing? > "I can't wait until I can jack into the Metaverse and buy an NFT with cryptocur…
3D TVs and metaverses and WiMAX and all that are prior examples of massively overhyped technological failures. (They missed the Segway.)
What about Bolt? The tool that I use to create designs for me. That's a failure, too?
They are very good at some tasks and terrible at others. I use LLMs for language-related work (translations, grammatical explanations etc) and they are top notch in that as long as you do not ask for references to particular grammar rules. In that case they will invent non-existent references. They are also good for tutor personas: give me jj/git/emacs commands for this situation. But they are bad in other cases. I s…
Would you share your system prompt for that grammatical checker?
The languages I am learning have verb conjugations and noun declensions. So I write a prompt asking the LLM to break the given paragraphs down sentence-by-sentence by giving me the general sentence level English translation plus word-by-word grammar and (contextual) meaning.
For the grammar, I ask for the verbal root/noun stem, the case/person/number, any information on indeclinables, the affix categories etc.
> “To stave off some obvious comments: > yoUr'E PRoMPTiNg IT WRoNg! > Am I though?” Yes. You’re complaining that Gemini “shits the bed”, despite using 2.5 Flash (not Pro), without search or reasoning. It’s a fact that some models are smarter than others. This is a task that requires reasoning so the article is hard to take seriously when the author uses a model optimised for speed (not intelligence), and doesn’t even…
I just ran the same test on Gemini 2.5 pro (I assume it enables search by default, because it added a bunch of "sources") and got the exact same result as the author. It claims ".bdi" is the ccTLD for Burundi, which is false they have .bi[1]. It claims ".time" and ".article" are TLDs. I think the authors point stands. EDIT: I tried it with "Deep Research" too. Here it doesn't invent either TLDs or HTML Element, but t…
There is also the question of the two input lists: it's not clear if it is better to ask the LLM to extract the two input lists directly, or again to ask the LLM to write a script that extract the two input lists from the raw text data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This works great in Claude Sonnet 4.1: 'Please could you research a list of valid TLDs and a list of valid HTML5 elements, then cross reference them to produce a list of HTML5 elements which are also valid TLDs. Use search to find URLs to the lists, then use the analysis tool to write a script that downloads the lists, normalises and intersects them.' Ok, I only have to: 1. Generally solve the problem for the AI 2.…
Try doing all of that by hand instead. The difference is about half an hour to an hour of work plus giving your attention to such a minor menial task. Also, you are literally describing how you are holding it wrong. If you expect the LLM to magically know what you want from it without you yourself having to make the task understandable to the machine, you are standing in front of your dishwasher waiting for it to gro…
No. I'm standing in front of the dishwasher and the dishwasher expects me to tell it in detail how to wash the dishes.
This is not about if you can find any use for a LLM at all. This is about:
> LLMs are still surprisingly bad at some simple tasks
And yes. They are bad if you have to hand feed them each and every detail for an extremely simple task like comparing two lists.
You even have to debug the result because you cannot be sure that the dishwasher really washed the dishes. Maybe it just said it did.
https://chatgpt.com/share/68cffaab-4c14-8006-89a2-1818172e4d... Tried on ChatGPT, seems fine.
Correct. This actually falsifies OP's argument. Compared to OP's list from 2 years ago [1] ChatGPT omits ".search" but it says it's not a TLD anymore. GPT also finds 2 near misses, picture(s) and code(s). It does this in 10 minutes with 33 reasoning steps. It verifies them and provides citations in this time. Also checks OpenAI policy documents for some reason. [1] https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2023/09/false-friends-html-…
Not sure where you got that information from (can't find it in any of the 3 ChatGPT logs here), and I'm pretty sure that it's false.
It's still a part of the official IANA list[0] that it referenced in my chat log , and from what I can tell there has been no delisting of that TLD. (It's always been a niche Google-only TLD, though).
From all indications it doesn't pick up `search` because it doesn't recognize it as an HTML element.
They are very good at some tasks and terrible at others. I use LLMs for language-related work (translations, grammatical explanations etc) and they are top notch in that as long as you do not ask for references to particular grammar rules. In that case they will invent non-existent references. They are also good for tutor personas: give me jj/git/emacs commands for this situation. But they are bad in other cases. I s…
I think Gemini is one of the best example of an LLM that is in some cases the best and in some cases truly the worst. I once asked it to read a postcard written by my late grandfather in Polish, as I was struggling to decipher it. It incorrectly identified the text as Romanian and kept insisting on that, even after I corrected it: "I understand you are insistent that the language is Polish. However, I have carefully…
> “To stave off some obvious comments: > yoUr'E PRoMPTiNg IT WRoNg! > Am I though?” Yes. You’re complaining that Gemini “shits the bed”, despite using 2.5 Flash (not Pro), without search or reasoning. It’s a fact that some models are smarter than others. This is a task that requires reasoning so the article is hard to take seriously when the author uses a model optimised for speed (not intelligence), and doesn’t even…
I just ran the same test on Gemini 2.5 pro (I assume it enables search by default, because it added a bunch of "sources") and got the exact same result as the author. It claims ".bdi" is the ccTLD for Burundi, which is false they have .bi[1]. It claims ".time" and ".article" are TLDs. I think the authors point stands. EDIT: I tried it with "Deep Research" too. Here it doesn't invent either TLDs or HTML Element, but t…
Maybe they will be in a time frame when the LLM model is still in use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Try doing all of that by hand instead. The difference is about half an hour to an hour of work plus giving your attention to such a minor menial task. Also, you are literally describing how you are holding it wrong. If you expect the LLM to magically know what you want from it without you yourself having to make the task understandable to the machine, you are standing in front of your dishwasher waiting for it to gro…
> you are standing in front of your dishwasher waiting for it to grow arms and do your dishes in the sink. No. I'm standing in front of the dishwasher and the dishwasher expects me to tell it in detail how to wash the dishes. This is not about if you can find any use for a LLM at all. This is about: > LLMs are still surprisingly bad at some simple tasks And yes. They are bad if you have to hand feed them each and eve…
You believe 57 words are "each and every detail", and that "produce two full, exhaustive lists of items out of your blackbox inner conceptspace/fetch those from the web" are "extremely simple tasks"?
Your ignorance of how complex these problems are misleads you into believing there's nothing to it. You are trying to supply an abstraction to a system that requires a concrete. You do not even realize your abstraction is an abstraction. Try learning programming.