> You evidently have a very restricted notion of what is "new", which > seems to be specifically tailored to your goal of asserting that LLMs > and ML technology in general cannot produce anything that is > traditionally considered to be result of creative activities. You > basically fire first, and draw the target around the hit point later. > It is pointless to argue with you as long as this is your attitude, > because you are not open to considering ideas and opinions different > from yours. > > (And no, ML and LLMs do not engage in combinatorial computations, they > solve problems differently, and that is why they succeed, because in > many cases the problems are NP-hard, so cannot be solved by dumb > exhaustive search of the solution space.)
No. You didn't get it. I just asked for examples, which I can't find easily. --- via emacs-tangents mailing list (https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-tangents)
