News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from... by spankalee on Wednesday June 05, 2024 @06:09PM (#40591171)
Why would you ever consider asking an LLM a question like this though? They just make plausible-sounding things up, even if sometimes they're correct.
Re:What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from... by bongodongobob on Wednesday June 05, 2024 @06:15PM (#40591224)
If you tell it to use wolframalpha it could probably do some ballpark spherical cow physics.
Re:What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from... by perrygeo on Wednesday June 05, 2024 @07:53PM (#40591960)
Amazing comment for two reasons:

The idea of asking an LLM to generate code for a more rigorous but still high-level language is under-explored. This way you can experiment with AI - but at least have an intermediate code artifact that you can review and test before it gets published! Exposing the raw token stream is reckless.

I had never heard of "spherical cow" science before but I love the imagery.

Re:What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from... by Cyphase on Wednesday June 05, 2024 @09:10PM (#40592381)
You really are one of today's lucky 10,000!

For anyone else: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow

Meta reference: https://xkcd.com/1053/

Re:What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from... by burnished on Wednesday June 05, 2024 @09:27PM (#40592478)
Because with an LLM you can walk away confused for only a fraction of the frustration and time of the old way.
Re:What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from... by ben_w on Thursday June 06, 2024 @03:34AM (#40594581)
Why? Same reason I'd ask a student in the second year of a degree — knows more than I do.

> They just make plausible-sounding things up, even if sometimes they're correct.

This is indistinguishable from my experience described above.

Re:What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from... by mort96 on Thursday June 06, 2024 @08:11AM (#40596478)
I think the point of the comparison with LLMs was to disparage StackExchange, I don't think they disagree with your view of LLMs