Re: [emacs-tangents] What was ever truly innovated by some of Large Language Models?

2025-03-09 Thread Eli Zaretskii
> Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2025 16:08:24 +0300 > From: Jean Louis > Cc: van...@sdf.org, emacs-tangents@gnu.org > > Too many opinions, zero examples. You don't accept expert opinions without examples? That would mean you will accept only a very small amount of opinions. A complete example of using ML t

Re: [emacs-tangents] What was ever truly innovated by some of Large Language Models?

2025-03-09 Thread Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Jean Louis >> Too many opinions, zero examples. > > You don't accept expert opinions without examples? That would mean > you will accept only a very small amount of opinions. > > A complete example of using ML to solve non-trivial problems will take > hours to des

[emacs-tangents] [FINALLY SOLVED] Re: What was ever truly innovated by some of Large Language Models?

2025-03-09 Thread Jean Louis
* Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide [2025-03-09 20:47]: > Alpha Go showed that reinforcement learning systems can outperform the > best humans on earth in specific tasks. so much should be undisputed. > > Alpha Go changed fundamentally how humans play Go. > > Here’s a nice to read discussion of a hobbyi

Re: [emacs-tangents] What was ever truly innovated by some of Large Language Models?

2025-03-09 Thread Van Ly via Emacs news and miscellaneous discussions outside the scope of other Emacs mailing lists
Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2025 20:31:44 +0300 >> From: Jean Louis >> Cc: van...@sdf.org, emacs-tangents@gnu.org >> >> * Eli Zaretskii [2025-03-08 13:09]: >> > > Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2025 00:51:23 +0300 >> > > From: Jean Louis >> > > Cc: emacs-tangents@gnu.org >> > > >> >> > Whe

Re: [emacs-tangents] What was ever truly innovated by some of Large Language Models?

2025-03-09 Thread Jean Louis
Sure. Though ANY output of ANY LLM, I only consider as a generated text draft for human to be verified. I don't think there is the answer below that you wanted to get. Can it think? I don't think so. > What is the `Microsoft Phi-4' model response to the prompt: > > What about Roy Herbert's

Re: [emacs-tangents] What was ever truly innovated by some of Large Language Models?

2025-03-09 Thread Jean Louis
Hello, The discussion started from me being curious if there is anything truly innovative invented by a LLM or similar systems. Too many opinions, zero examples. Innovation refers to the process of creating new ideas, products, services, or methods that bring about significant improvements over

Re: [emacs-tangents] What was ever truly innovated by some of Large Language Models?

2025-03-09 Thread Jean Louis
* Eli Zaretskii [2025-03-09 17:39]: > > Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2025 16:08:24 +0300 > > From: Jean Louis > > Cc: van...@sdf.org, emacs-tangents@gnu.org > > > > Too many opinions, zero examples. > > You don't accept expert opinions without examples? That would mean > you will accept only a very small

Re: [emacs-tangents] [FINALLY SOLVED] Re: What was ever truly innovated by some of Large Language Models?

2025-03-09 Thread Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
Jean Louis writes: > * Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide [2025-03-09 20:47]: >> Alpha Go showed that reinforcement learning systems can outperform the >> best humans on earth in specific tasks. so much should be undisputed. >> >> Alpha Go changed fundamentally how humans play Go. >> … >> Based on that

Re: [emacs-tangents] [FINALLY SOLVED] Re: What was ever truly innovated by some of Large Language Models?

2025-03-09 Thread Jean Louis
* Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide [2025-03-09 23:03]: > Maybe this is the misconception: before Alpha Go, no computer was able > to beat even moderate human players. > > Go was the bane of game-AI. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/11/new-go-playing-trick-defeats-world-class-go-ai-bu

Re: [emacs-tangents] [FINALLY SOLVED] Re: What was ever truly innovated by some of Large Language Models?

2025-03-09 Thread Jean Louis
> 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, a