3 ms·

It’s interesting how people insist math requires expert validation when it’s literally the most self validating subject there is. The instinct to gatekeep even

It’s interesting how people insist math requires expert validation when it’s literally the most self validating subject there is. The instinct to gatekeep even something as mechanistically checkable as algebra says more about insecurity in education than it does about rigor.

Blackthorn 1y ago
Wanting an actual check on the device that is notorious for making things up is gatekeeping now?
- baklavaEmperor 1y ago
  You’re projecting a bad faith use case that the original commenter never described. they’re using it in a exploratory and iterative way, not deferential.
  - Blackthorn 1y ago
    If you're using it for education it is by definition deferential.
    - tptacek 1y ago
      No it isn't. Again, what's happening here I think is that this thread doesn't understand what Math Academy is. It's not an LLM. I'm using the LLM alongside it.
adrianton3 1y ago
"5.11 or 5.9 which number is greater?" was a meme query a few months ago to ask an LLM as it would confidenly prove how 5.11 is greater - so yes, we do need expert validation!
- baklavaEmperor 1y ago
  I think you’re misreading the situation. the original commenter isn’t outsourcing thinking, they’re using the tool to probe and test ideas, not to blindly accept end result answers which LLMs are (currently) not to be blindly trusted.
- tptacek 1y ago
  A very, very big problem we have with LLM discourse is that LLMs have changed radically since the beginning of last year. If you're making an argument about modern foundation models based on the idea that they can't generate reliably correct answers to whether 5.11 is greater than 5.9, your mental model is completely out of date. You don't have to believe me on this, just your own lying eyes. Go try this for yourself right now: ask it dy/dx of h(x)/g(x) where h(x) is x^3 + 1 and g(x) is -2e^x. That's a random Math Academy review problem I did last night that I pulled out of Notes.app. Go look.

Blackthorn 1y ago

Wanting an actual check on the device that is notorious for making things up is gatekeeping now?

baklavaEmperor 1y ago
You’re projecting a bad faith use case that the original commenter never described. they’re using it in a exploratory and iterative way, not deferential.
- Blackthorn 1y ago
  If you're using it for education it is by definition deferential.
  - tptacek 1y ago
    No it isn't. Again, what's happening here I think is that this thread doesn't understand what Math Academy is. It's not an LLM. I'm using the LLM alongside it.

adrianton3 1y ago

"5.11 or 5.9 which number is greater?" was a meme query a few months ago to ask an LLM as it would confidenly prove how 5.11 is greater - so yes, we do need expert validation!

baklavaEmperor 1y ago
I think you’re misreading the situation. the original commenter isn’t outsourcing thinking, they’re using the tool to probe and test ideas, not to blindly accept end result answers which LLMs are (currently) not to be blindly trusted.
tptacek 1y ago
A very, very big problem we have with LLM discourse is that LLMs have changed radically since the beginning of last year. If you're making an argument about modern foundation models based on the idea that they can't generate reliably correct answers to whether 5.11 is greater than 5.9, your mental model is completely out of date. You don't have to believe me on this, just your own lying eyes. Go try this for yourself right now: ask it dy/dx of h(x)/g(x) where h(x) is x^3 + 1 and g(x) is -2e^x. That's a random Math Academy review problem I did last night that I pulled out of Notes.app. Go look.