4 ms·
I also think that this broad claim (LLMs are good for learning) is also a testable hypothesis, and given the size of the AI industry I think it is reasonable to
by runarberg 2mo ago
I also think that this broad claim (LLMs are good for learning) is also a testable hypothesis, and given the size of the AI industry I think it is reasonable to assume that AI companies would be eager to proof that LLMs are good for learning (and then pushing their own proprietary implementations into school systems and make more money).
The absence of evidence here feels very much like evidence of absence. At least my cynical view of capitalism tells me that if there was a good way to use LLMs to learn stuff, we would have research showing it, and AI companies would be waving that research all over our faces.
- engineer_22 2mo agoLLM have only been useful for ~12 months (arguably <6 months). Too early to throw the baby out with the bathwater...
- runarberg 2mo agoLLM‘s have been useful for ~12 months for the past 3 years. I’m not buying this any more: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateEnd=1753056000&dateRange=custom&dateStart=1720915200&page=0&prefix=false&query=last%20year%20models%20better&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateEnd=1753056000&dateRange=custom&...
- engineer_22 2mo agoThey released air tools but you’d rather use a hammer to drive nails. It reflects more on /you/ than on the technology.
- hackrmn 2mo agoWhat are you referring to with "they released air tools"? I am not sure I am able to interpret your argument in any meaningful way.