3 ms·
You stated that an LLM can replace a book. As far as I know in the field of logic the one making a statement, in this case you, is the one who has to prove it.
by lomase 1y ago
You stated that an LLM can replace a book.
As far as I know in the field of logic the one making a statement, in this case you, is the one who has to prove it.
But in this case you make a statemen and then ask ME to prove it wrong? Makes zero fucking sense.
As much as you don't apreciate it, that is how debate and logic works.
- simonw 1y agoThe idea that an LLM can replace the role of a book doesn't seem like it should even be controversial to me. You buy a non-fiction book to learn something, or to act as a reference. An LLM provides an alternative mechanism for learning that thing, or looking up those reference points. What am I missing here? Do you think a search engine could replace a book?
- lomase 1y agoSo you are not only stating than a LLM can replace a book. Directly you are saying that it is an axiom. It is so self evident true that you don't even need to reason about it. That LLMs can replace a book is a fundamental truth of the universe like the euclid postulates or like 1=1. Well then there is no way to continue the conversation, because by definition axioms can't be false.
- simonw 1y agoI'm happy to be convinced otherwise, but you'll have to make a concrete argument rather than just critiquing the way I'm discussing this.