Post #1618964

2026-03-28 07:19 UTC

Well... It cannot even search databases without errors. LLMs just produce plausible replies in natural languages very quickly and this is useful in certain situations. Sometimes it helps humans getting started with a task, but as it is now, it cannot replace them. As much as the capital class want it, and sink our money into it.

Replies (2)

@fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 2026-03-28 14:35

The better setup generate "semantic embeddings" that try to map how data stored relate to each other (by mapping how to it related within in its own weights and biases). That and knowledge graph look ups in which the links between different articles of data are evaluated in the same way. The very expensive LLM portion really do just give rough aproximations of information language in that setup

Open ##1618965
@jj4211@lemmy.world 2026-03-28 14:33

Yes, the key thing is it *might* have extracted useful info from otherwise confusing data, it might have mixed up info from the data incorrectly or it might have just made it up. So it can be useful, if you can then validate the info provided in more traditional means, but it's dubious as a first pass, and sometimes surprisingly bad when it's a scenario you *thought* it would work well at.

Open ##1618966