Beginner-friendliness of RF Circuit Design by Chris Bowick - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / beginners

author: gana24
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 06:33:24 am
content: I have learnt from the posts here that RF Circuit Design book is said to be very beginner-friendly book but I am actually having a hard time in going through the book. I am actually studying the book as preparation for my internship as RF Engineer and I and the other interns have to present each chapter every month but I feel like it has advanced concepts and ideas but with little details and I could not find additional resources to supplement my learning of the book. Well, I tried using ChatGPT but I simply don't find the explanations trustworthy and it seems just like guessing to me. Am I reading too much into the concepts or I am simply just dumb? How do people usually go trough this book? Do they just skim through the book?

author: ftg
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 07:16:45 am
content: What are the hard concepts?I checked the contents shown on archive.org and it seems to go through the basic concepts and then building on top of them.But I have no idea how the book presents them.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 07:40:38 am
content: Quote from: gana24 on April 17, 2025, 06:33:24 amLLMs work by "reading" training texts, and assembling sequences of words that arestatisticallysimilar to those found in the training texts. Since the sentences are grammatically correct, many people are fooled into believing them - but you have not fallen into that trapWhen humans do the same, the "word salad" they produce is termed "bullshit", and that also fools many peopleQuoteThe same way you have read other textbooks, articles and learned papers.Personally I like iterating between understanding the theory and using the theory practically.No, it isn't easy. Yes, it does take time. That is true ofeverythingworth doing, and has thebenefitthat you will continue to be learning for the rest of your career

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 08:25:07 am
content: Not sure what you mean by beginner-friendly. I've just browsed the book, and the book looks to me like a recap for an EE (Electrical Engineer) graduate, with some examples and exercises/homework.If you are an EE graduate (preferably with a specialization in telecommunications or alike RF related), you should already be familiar with the theory, and with all the basic concepts. The book only reminds them, then give some examples of how to apply that. Otherwise it would be impossible for a book to go from zero to RF design in only 200 pages or so.

author: timeandfrequency
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 09:33:47 am
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on April 17, 2025, 08:25:07 amFor your training, some more book referenceshere.AI generates sentences that mimic human writing, but there's no guarantee that the resulting document is scientifically valid. A skilled reader can detect whether the text is correct or just crap.A person learning a new field and using AI-generated information to learn is likely unable to detect bullshitAnd when AI reuses AI generated information for its training, it leads to AI poisonning...

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 09:48:42 am
content: Quote from: timeandfrequency on April 17, 2025, 09:33:47 amYup.In order to detect LLM bullshit, you need to be an expert in the subject. And in that case you probably wouldn't be using an LLM.I wish more people recognised that. Too manyactively choosenot to recognise it There are valid such uses, but they are exceptions.

author: gana24
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 10:33:17 am
content: I am not sure if I should call it hard but I was required to present on "coupling of resonator circuit" and it was just a small subtopic and the book does go in detail on it and I tried my best to grasp the theory and concept by googling (Google just gives me some research papers.), using YouTube used ChatGPT, Copilot even Deepseek to understand the concept and theory but at the end I failed since I can feel that the AI is just spouting nonsense since there are no supporting evidence. Maybe it was partially right but I just could not get it. At the end, I just copied some portion of the book and did simulation of capacitive coupling and inductive coupling when critically coupled and that's it and the superior at the company said sarcastically that AI could do better jobs than us. Well, that really hurt, and we were not given any clear instructions on what to present and I just followed what the others were doing and he said something like we are just wasting their time which is valuable when they are paid anything for the whole pre-internship program. Anyway, I think the book is more for just designing the circuit without thinking much about the theories.And to be honest, most concepts in the book were not covered in my program. I am doing Electronics Engineering (specializing in ESD for the final year, nobody from my batch wanted to take Telecommunication specialization field so I wasn't allowed either), and my three year of studies did not most of the stuffs in the book so I spent a considerable amount of time in the book but maybe my approach of trying to study and understand the book was just wrong, I guess.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 11:14:12 am
content: Quote from: gana24 on April 17, 2025, 10:33:17 amMake sure they know how LLMs work - and fail. In particular, use the "bullshit" analogy. Tell them you think LLMs could dotheirjob better; you would probably be right.QuoteIt was useful to you: you learned what type of person is encouraged at that company.Now, when you seek to find work in other companies, you will have a better idea of what to look out for. Never forget you are interviewing the company as much as they are interviewing you.QuoteElectrostatic discharge seemsreallyspecialised.Not necessarily a wrong approach. Learning how to learn is a key skill, which will be useful for your entire career.

author: gana24
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 12:19:11 pm
content: ESD refers to Electronic System Design. I got used to the abbreviation at my university. I guess I just learnt what kind of company that is so I wouldn't take into consideration while interning with them. I cannot change my internship at this point of time so I guess I will be a 'yesman' throughout three months and find a 'real' place to work at after graduating. I don't want to slander the company so I won't name it but it's a very famous Multinational Company involved in testing so I was quite happy when I received the offer but feel a bit disappointed now.Thanks everyone for the kind words and advice.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 12:24:18 pm
content: A good way to meet the expectations of whoever is looking at a presentation is to ask for clarifications in advance. Ask what you are suppose to talk about, what aspects to present, what level of details, if it's from a pure theoretical or from a practical perspective, etc. Try to find out what is expected before starting to research the topic.Ask directly what it should be about, or how do they want your presentation to be. There's nothing wrong in asking in advance. Take written notes of the aspects they want highlighted in the presentation. Ask for their expectations even if youdon'tknow yet the topic. Not knowing the topic shouldn't intimidate you.This way you get the guidelines for what to research "from the horse's mouth". Same words "coupling of resonator circuit" may mean different things in different contexts, and may produce very different expectations from one industry to another, or from one company to another, and they know that.So, don't be afraid to ask for clarifications, or even for guidance if possible.Also, don't use ChatGPT in engineering, you already noticed why.

author: Fflint
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 12:35:09 pm
content: Using LLMs is a skill like any other. You have to learn it. Saying stuff like they are bullshit generators is like people who used to make custom furniture in 1800 seeing factory flat packs for the first time and saying no one will want that crap... Guess what. We all have flat pack furniture now.And I guarantee you, use of LLMs will be a skill you'll use in your job in next few years if you're not using it yet.I am. 90% of my job for last year has been prompting and filtering LLM output. Even my hobby code now is generated by LLM and then I fix it. It is still at least 2x faster than writing it from scratch.Also I use it a lot for learning. Having difficult math or physics concepts translated to simple python code. If you don't understand something you can have it make you charts and stuff. But it is a machine, not a human. It will try to "run into the weeds" at every slightest occasion you give it.So. Don't listen to all these people who say LLMs are just bullshit generators. Learn to use them. Don't trust their output. But don't just avoid it altogether. Man if those things were available when I was in school.... There would be no subject I could not understand (eventually).Also chatgpt is not the end of it. I find Anthropic's claude opus better (but more expensive - I uee the api, can't say much about the chat interface)

author: timeandfrequency
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 01:08:00 pm
content: Quote from: gana24 on April 17, 2025, 12:19:11 pmThat's not really the best choice for an acronymI was convinced you were talking aboutthat.Quote from: RoGeorge on April 17, 2025, 12:24:18 pmFor those who need additional clues, we havesome on the forum. Onemore.To be clear, I'm not against AI : I use neural networks software for more than 25 years. It's a tool like others which needs to be learned. And like other tools, it provides interesting and useful features, but has also some drawbacks.Quote from: gana24 on April 17, 2025, 10:33:17 amMaybe your superior should have anAI-enhanced drinkto revise his perspective

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 02:03:50 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on April 17, 2025, 12:24:18 pmIt isgoodto ask relevant questions; it increases the chance the client will be satisfied. That is a good skill to have in a job, therefore a good skill to demonstrate during interview.

author: timeandfrequency
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 02:26:53 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on April 17, 2025, 02:03:50 pmSometimes you might have to ask so many questions that the client is no longer entirely convinced that what he's asking for is actually what he needs.After that, you can present and sell your proposal.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 02:46:31 pm
content: Quote from: Fflint on April 17, 2025, 12:35:09 pmStupid analogy. Flatpack's furniture doesn't have unknownand unknowablebehaviour.That's been a problem for 40 years(!), seen in Igor Aleksander's WISARD, where it detected the weather rather than vehicle type. Here are recent examples...https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/32/80/#subj4.1https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/07/30/1030329/machine-learning-ai-failed-covid-hospital-diagnosis-pandemic/You will note a common problem: it is not possible to determine what LLMs are detecting. Those examples show similar problems, detecting font and person's position rather than the medical details.There are other classes of ways in which LLMs can - and do - fail.https://spectrum.ieee.org/ai-failuresQuoteHere's a potentially valuable use of LLMs...https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/evaluation-deep-research-performanceThat is an evaluation of OpenAI on a topic that is unfamiliar to all here. Benefit: we won't get hung up on the specific topic: we will be forced to concentrate on the mechanisms and conclusions that are true in all fields. You will note that Derek Lowe acknowledges the good points in the output. That's unsurprising since he is continually looking for ways in which machines can aid his field.Pay particular attention to his conclusions in the last paragraph.QuoteSuch use has already enabled a new form of security attack, neatly called "slopsquatting". It is probably best thought of as a "bill of materials" attack, not a supply chain attack.https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2025/04/slopsquatting.htmlQuoteThey will indeed - and you have to be an expert to see when that has happened. If you are a subject expert, you probably don't need an LLM.QuoteThey aren't bullshit generators. They are generators of permutations of words that often go together in similar situations. When humans emit those, it is called "word salad" and "bullshit".And if you think you could understand anything (eventually), then you don't realise how complex and subtle many subjects are.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 02:49:21 pm
content: Quote from: timeandfrequency on April 17, 2025, 02:26:53 pmClientsfrequentlyask for the wrong thing. It is so common it even has a name: the XY Problemhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_problem

author: timeandfrequency
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2025, 05:43:54 pm
content: Quote from: edavid on April 17, 2025, 04:46:42 pmAnd complete the simulation sequence with someprogramming.

author: Fflint
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2025, 09:33:56 am
content: First let me say sorry to the op for taking this thread sideways, but the information talked about may be of some use still.Quote from: tggzzz on April 17, 2025, 02:46:31 pmIf there is one thing to take away from my previous post it is that I am a subject matter expert in my job. Do I need an LLM? No, I've been doing perfectly fine for 2 decades before I even heard of them including in other roles within It industry.But my point is it has transformed the majority of what I do for great benefit.By the examples of AI failures you give it is completely clear that we talk about two different things. I speak about use of LLMs in particular in two situations. As a study tool and as code generator/parser . Code that you still have to understand and review(you can be a little more trusting about the code parsing output). If it writes code you do not understand tell it to do the exact same thing but simplify the syntax.If you'd like to expand this thread to a wider scope let me comment on this "covid AI failure". Where LLMs and AI in general is and where the marketing puts them to be is quite far away. That whole "reasoning" side of things very rarely works.Likewise with this covid triaging. The entire idea was a long shot. You know where simple AI works really well in medicine? In highlighting things on USG pictures. My partner was getting a routine USG scan you're supposed to get above a certain age. She said the computer has notified the doc about "something being wrong", drew a frame around it, put dimensions including volume on it. This is a good use of AI in medicine. Helping the doctor, not skipping them altogether. Whether they get used to it and start treating a lack of highlighting as a negative and don't actually look through the scan thinking "if there was something the computer would flag it" that is a clear danger that should be thought to users of such systems.Coming back to the original point. Do you have to be an expert in the field to notice when LLMs hallucinate. I don't think so. You can guide it to provide simpler, verifiable information and build from that. As mentioned I use it for things I'm not an expert in as well. And "catching it" is a big part of it. But even if you waste 50% of the time on that you're still ahead if your combined result is better and the ratio of time it would take you to do it by yourself vs with an LLM is over 2. Sometimes, like with certain topics in math or physics the ratio would be infinite, because I'd never be able to understand them without having an LLM to work it through with. In this way an LLM is one of those tools like a microscope. It opens a completely new world to you. But you need some basic knowledge. You can't give an LLM to a 6 year old and expect good outcomes.The key thing to understand is that LLMs do not think. They do not reason. They are essentially a lossy compression and retrieval mechanism of all their training data. But it is that retrieval that makes them amazing. They connect the topics and ideas in ways that no other software tool can do. Do they make errors? Yes, lots, but they are operated with human language so you can guide them out of it.I've tried to educate people close to me how to use LLMs even when you're not an expert and that has been somewhat of a failure. I'm not sure why most people have such a hard time getting good output. I suspect they go in too fast and too deep.Or perhaps one of the big strengths, that LLMs use natural language, gives people this idea "I can speak so I can prompt well". No, it's more like programming that you'd think.Edit: Also a important note, I've never read the book so I'm not sure if that applies. But LLMs suck at what could be called imagining diagrams, schematics and so on. Don't ask them to explain to you a schematic. That will almost certainly not work, unless for the most basic of things.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2025, 10:03:31 am
content: I noted some potentially good uses for LLMs.I noted an example where someonewantsLLMs to assist efforts, has evaluated them, and produced anuancedreview of the success and failure.You use LLMs for coding, but did not address thecurrent real-worlddanger introduced by LLMs: slopsquatting. That will be exacerbated by Dunning-Kruger coders who proselytize "vibe coding".LLMs are being "sold" (both metaphorically and literally) on the grounds of unrealistic claimed benefits. Some people will believe LLM outputs, either through ignorance or because they have a financial stake in them succeeding. Lives will be lost and/or ruined "because thecomputerLLM says so".All tools have advantages and disadvantages. The LLM failure modes are subtle and often require experts to spot them, but superficially polished. That is a dangerous combination. financial exclusion, incarceration in jail, road traffic accidents, medical mistakes, etc

author: abeyer
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2025, 08:54:21 pm
content: Quote from: timeandfrequency on April 17, 2025, 01:08:00 pmJust so long as he doesn't wanta full glass of wine.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 18, 2025, 09:21:02 pm
content: As Euclid may have said, “there is no royal road to learning.”(Or, geometry, or mathematics)

author: KE5FX
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2025, 04:30:11 am
content: Quote from: abeyer on April 18, 2025, 08:54:21 pmOooh, ooh, ooh, do the one about counting the 'r's in 'Strawberry.' That one's always good for a laugh!Now try it with a current-gen multi-modal LLM.If you enjoy being wrong -- ultimately to the extent of being unemployable -- then by all means, listen to the opinions in threads like this one.

author: shabaz
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2025, 01:35:26 pm
content: Quote from: gana24 on April 17, 2025, 06:33:24 amI took a look on my Kindle (I liked this book enough to have a paper copy of it too) and the chapter on resonant circuit coupling looks like a great start, considering this is a concise book. More than enough info in that chapter to be able to research further if desired.Quote from: gana24That's a problem. Take it seriously. The topic is interesting, because it's non-intuitive what to expect when the resonant circuits are coupled, and what the real-life issues may be. Even if you don't understand it all (I certainly don't), you'll become a mini subject-matter-expert in parts of the topic if you put in the effort.Sometimes to help engage the attention of people, try to find something from current affairs (or from history if you can't do that) and briefly mention it, so people can associate with real-life. For instance, googling will find you photos of crystal and mechanical filters, so you could have used such a photo as a conversation point to kick off the presentation.Quote from: RoGeorgeI'm the same too. I try to know the audience in detail if possible, including the job title of everyone that is going to be there.Hopefully you (OP) know your audience (research that in advance as mentioned, it's bad form to ask on the day, or to look unprepared for your audience; I once experienced a senior person erupt (in Italian so I didn't understand it!) because he saw a presentation being closed and another opened, and he mistakenly thought I had not prepared - he had to be reassured by others in Italian, that we had deliberately split the slides into two for the benefit of his engineers).Personally I like to keep things simple if possible, and have some slide titles semi-framed as questions as basic as (say after "Topics"), "What is it?", "What's it useful for?", and other titles like "Best Practices", "Summary", a reference slide with links for more info, "Q&A" (don't be afraid of questions - be bold, the audience will usually be on your side and not hostile) and so on. And you can always have hidden backup slides if the interaction deep-dives into places.Read the room, pause, ask questions so that you're getting feedback live, and adapt on-the-fly if you've hit the wrong level and you're teaching them to suck eggs, or if they are completely lost.Regarding the actual presentation slides, expect to spend anywhere from between an hour to half a day preparing each slide. Anything less than an hour of such preparation is likely too short to be worthy of a slide (unless it's say an admin type of slide).Therefore, if you've got half a dozen slides, then expect to spend several days preparing it, anywhere up to a week.Spend an hour per slide practicing your delivery. Expect to do a dry run with a colleague and listen and act on any feedback. It's good sometimes to find someone who is not a subject-matter-expert, so that they ask the obvious questions that you may miss otherwise.Don't read off the slide when presenting (it's good to have presenter notes however, for others to be able to present your slides in future too). Make sure everyone can hear you, don't be timid.If you want to be even more thorough, get a colleague to act as your assistant to write down questions from the audience if you find you cannot answer some, so that you can address them later by e-mail or whatever (i.e. be honest, never lie if you don't know something).Anyway, the above is just what works for me most of the time. Others will have their own experiences which may differ.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2025, 02:44:18 pm
content: For presentations, I used an old rule-of-thumb from Kodak, back in the days where presentations projected 35 mm slides, scaling to the actual geometry in new media.For each slide (or page, etc.) restrict the content to double-spaced typing on a 3 x 5 inch card.More stuff shown at one time is difficult for the viewer in the audience to read.Too many presentations use a page that belongs in a book format, where the reader holds the book and can inspect the page.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2025, 03:03:30 pm
content: Quote from: shabaz on April 19, 2025, 01:35:26 pmThat's tricky, indeed. Did once a simulation with 2 coupled resonant circuits, and attached a slider to modify either the coupling factor, or the resonant frequency of one of the sides:(starting at about second 25 in the video, after attaching a slider for the value of the coupling factor K and another slider for the capacitor value C, dragging the sliders directly affect the values of K and C in the schematic, and live-updates the plots with the circuit's frequency response)Notice how the frequency response peak splits into two frequency peaks that moves away from each other when changing the coupling factor by dragging the first slider, or how changing the resonant frequency of one of the LC appears in the live simulation as if the other resonant peak is "pushed" because the 2 circuits are coupled.Physicists called it 'line splitting' and it was noticed before the beginning of RF as a spectral line splitting in the light produced by burning:QuoteQuoted text is from:https://www.physics.udel.edu/~jim/PHYS425_20S/Class%20Notes/Notes_4.pdfThat's a very unintuitive behavior, and it happens the same not only in LC coupled circuits, but in any type of coupled resonators, no matter if they are mechanical resonators, or electrical, or maybe social phenomena coupled resonance.

author: shabaz
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2025, 03:21:34 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on April 19, 2025, 02:44:18 pmMakes sense. And if he's done it right, the audience will be looking at him more than at the slides. And their facial expressions is the quickest way of getting feedback (since, if the OP has done the preparation, OP barely need to glance at their slides either, and can focus attention on their audience).Would also say, although it sounds cheesy to do so, it's worth watching others present, (e.g. online videos of people presenting if you can't see it in person) to pick up some tips.For instance, although again it might be cheesy to walk while presenting, one might realize that might have advantages; in my case, I have a quieter voice than I would prefer, so to project it through a room, I will stand or walk very close to the audience rather than close to the laptop (very easy to do nowadays with Bluetooth laser pointers with slide controls built-in of course) and barely glance behind just to quickly ensure I'm on the correct slide.

author: shabaz
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2025, 03:29:40 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on April 19, 2025, 03:03:30 pmWow. Very interesting, effective video. The on-the-fly tuning really demonstrated the effect. I need to read up more on it, I didn't know the reason for it, but knew the peaks occurred. It's relevant for me right now because I'm debating buying a 45 MHz crystal filter for a home project, versus trying to DIY something. QUCS is incredible software.

author: Fflint
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2025, 08:25:18 am
content: Continuing the AI discussion...Quote from: tggzzz on April 18, 2025, 10:03:31 amThat "slopsquatting" concept is pretty elaborate, but let me summarise for those that hav not heard about it. The idea is that AI hallucinates certain non existent libraries that do not exist, but it is somewhat consistent in its hallucinations (let's say people often ask "write me a bakery erm system" and the AI starts all their python code with "import bakery from magic-erm". There is no such thing as magic-erm, but some bad actor could notice this comes up in Google searches etc and creates "magic-erm" that then executes malicious code. If I misunderstood, correct me.I almost never come across such a thing because I almost always tell it what libraries to use (if it is different that the default, for example pandas for csv and tabular data". Also the way I use it, I often give it my existing code and I tell it to "be as close to this style of coding as possible, add this feature using same lubraries" and so on.Any time it brings a non existent thing I catch it at this stage, but for most part I use the same libraries all the time and when I know there isn't one (or I don't want having to install it) I tell it to implement from scratch. Actually that is what I found LLMs really good in. Take an existing library, let's say Google client libs to access secret manager and write me a simple function that does some subset of functionality without having to use Google libs.I would never let it "run away", build an entire system "autonomous agent" style and expect it not to blow up in my face very badly on the extremely unlikely event it actually works after spending $200 on api access and waiting half a day. No a human has to take a much more active role.Sorry, but it is nowhere near being close to a human coder replacement tool.To address this issue the human is expected to vet the software components used same as if they decided to use it themselves.Quote from: tggzzz on April 18, 2025, 10:03:31 amI had to look up that term as I never heard it before. If you looked over my shoulder it probably would look almost exactly as what I'm doing. But the whole premise of this "vibe coding" is the person doing it has no idea what's going on, just copies/pastes the code and it sort of works. That's very similar to the "autonomous agent" described before. Personally I think it is not much different.Let me also bring another point why it is extremely important to reign the AI in and force it to produce easily understandable, self documenting code in the exact same style of the code base and have a real senior dev review it. It is the size of the context window and the output quality deterioration that happens when you're nearing it.The best AI I use (Claude-Opus from anthropic) starts generating really simple errors if you give it more than a couple hundreds of lines as input. And even that is pushing it. It is best when dealing with few dozen lines MAX . Unless you're writing tiny utility scripts (which I often do). You have to have a mental picture of the entire system and selectively give it only the most relevant stuff.If you just copy paste 3 source files, each 2k lines long you'll get unusable crap for almost all but the simplest tasks and those simple tasks that supposedly "work" will be permeated by hard to detect errors a human would never make. An obvious solution to this are attempts to parse the entire codebase into more compact things and ask the ai to ask for parts it needs to see. But this doesn't work that well, because the modern LLM is not an "action agent" as marketers woukd want you to believe. It's training data makes it a "word completion tool" it can somewhat emulate the foresight present in "let me see the implementation of this function" but it is pure emulation. There is no reasoning behind it and it shows in output quality.Quote from: tggzzz on April 18, 2025, 10:03:31 amYes, 100% agree, but with a correction. Lives have already been lost because of overcinfidence (mostly self driving rather than LLMs) and there will be a lot more. As with any new tech it takes time for our society to adjust.Both "let's replace everyone with AI" and "they are word salad generators" are extremes that are not optimal for good use of this amazing tech.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2025, 08:58:08 am
content: Quote from: Fflint on April 20, 2025, 08:25:18 amUnfortunately it is necessary to fight fire with fire, i.e. grossly naively optimistic uses with simple easy sound bites.Has society adjusted to social media yet? No, and the consequences are appalling. LLMs have the potential to be similarly destructive.LLMs copy and mutate what they find. Hence they will entrench and exacerbate existing bad practices and behaviour, hidden behind unknowable internal decisions.LLMs are also copraphagous, regurgitating their own "droppings". That worries LLM researchers, as well it should.