I think you guys might be onto something but I'm still skeptic as to whether you are the most accurate (on whatever metric). It's not surprising that you beat a survey of experts, or straight out of the box commercial LLMs.

I'm more interested in seeing how your model performs against purpose specific models that are currently industry standard. Unless you're making the claim that you're the first service to predict content engagement?

The app is designed for older adults who enjoy reminiscing but struggle to organize their thoughts into a coherent narrative. The goal is to preserve their hard-won insights and pass them down—to family members who may be too busy to ask the right questions now, and to future generations who would otherwise never hear these stories.

I have a working prototype that allows me to test the interview flow, and I’ll soon be sharing it with friends and family for initial feedback. I’m now looking for a designer to collaborate on the next phase.

Design will be a critical part of this app. The way stories are visually presented will be central to the user experience and will likely determine the app’s success. If you’re a designer interested in this kind of work, I’d love to hear from you. Given the text-heavy nature of the app, experience with typography and content-focused design will be especially valuable.

I bring up my studies because what the author is talking about strikes me as not having been ambitious enough in his thinking. If you prompt current LLMs with your idea and find the generated arguments and reasoning satisfactory, then you aren't really being rigorous or you're not having big enough ideas.

I say this confidently because my studies showed me not only the methods in finding and contrasting evidence around any given issue, but also how much more there is to learn about the universe. So, if you're being rigorous enough to look at implications of your theories, finding datapoints that speak to your conclusions and find that your question has been answered, then your idea is too small for what the state of knowledge is in 2025.

The reality is that for now it is not possible to leave the human out of research, so I think the best LLM can only help curate sources and synthesize them, but cannot reliably write sound conclusions.

Edit: this is something elicit.com recognized quite early. But even when I was using it, I was wishing I had more control over the space over which the tool was conducting search.

I am starting to accept that this is a conversation we are going to be having over and over again, even after Elon and Trump. We are rightly traumatised by the excesses of the past, so it's very easy to imagine that any slight will inevitably lead to full on fascism.

This last qualification of fascism could be key, it differentiates 20th century fascism to what we are seeing today. We don't yet know whether this new form of fascism is just as harmful. For instance, when debating about whether Elon—who meets many of the elements in Eco's list—is a nazi or not, people are having very different conversations. There is no nazi party Elon can be a member of so that's not what I've been interested in. For me it has been more about the possibility of Elon advocating the same extreme policies fascist parties did. We could say he shares some of the worldview as the white supremacists, but would he go as far as implementing a 'final solution' to remedy the diagnosis?

For example, rather than using Plasmo for its browser extension boilerplate and packaging utilities, I’ve chosen to ask the LLM to setup all of that for me as it won’t have any blindspots when tasked with debugging.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42956352

Points: 1

# Comments: 0