Hacker News Reader

Comment by kzz102 | Hacker News Reader

It's really tiring that LLM fans will claim every progress as breakthrough and go into fantasy mode on what they can do afterwards.

This is a really good example of how to use the current capabilities of LLM to help research. The gist is that they turned math problems into problems for coding agents. This uses the current capabilities of LLM very well and should find more uses in other fields. I suspect the Alpha evolve system probably also has improvements over existing agents as well. AI is making steady and impressive process every year. But it's not helpful for either the proponents or the skeptics to exaggerate their capabilities.

View on HN

It's really tiring that LLM skeptics will always talk about LLM fans every time AI comes up to strawman AI and satisfy their fragile fantasy world where everything is the sign of an AI bubble.

But, yes this is a good way to use LLMs. Just like many other mundane and not news-worthy ways that LLMs are used today. The existence of fans doesn't require a denouncement of said fans at every turn.

I am criticizing how AI progress is reported and discussed -- given how important this development is, accurate communication is even more important for the discussion.

I think you inferring my motivation for the rant and creating a strawman yourself.

I do agree that directing my rant at the generic "fans" is not productive. The article Tao wrote was a good example of communicating the result. I should direct my criticism at specific instances of bad communication, but not the general "fans".

> The existence of fans doesn't require a denouncement of said fans at every turn.

When said 'fans' are harmful it really does.

Here's a counterexample to your hypothesis. Fans of Nazis require denouncement at every turn.

One could say the same about these kinds of comments. If you don't like the content, simply don't read it?

And to add something constructive: the timeframes for enjoying a hype cycle differ from person to person. If you are on top of things, it might be tiring, but there are still many people out there, who haven't made the connection between, in this case, LLMs and mathematics. Inspiring some people to work on this may be beneficial in the long run.

GP didn’t say they didn’t like it. They criticized it. These things are not the same.

Discussions critical of anything are important to true advancement of a field. Otherwise, we get a Theranos that hangs around longer and does even more damage.

I don't think you read the comment you replied to correctly. He praised the article and approach therein, contrasting it to the LLM hype cycle, where effusive praise is met with harsh scorn, both sides often completely forgetting the reality in the argument.

Did you read what she/he says?

Ah yes, the bootlicker's desire of letting the bootlickers winout so there is only walls of bootlicking for any agnostic that happens across a post.

I'd rather dissent so others know dissent is a rational response.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com