this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2025
416 points (98.8% liked)
Fediverse
38832 readers
1386 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think you might have missed my point. I wasn't listing stuff I had trouble understanding. I was listing stuff that didn't make much sense. The distinction is relevant. The end result, even if you manage to find some excuse that extends the already generous benefit of doubt, it still doesn't result in anything useful or informative.
I'm also not using fancy words (or..?). The only fancy thing that stands out is the the "Bloom filter", which isn't a fancy word. It's just a thing, in particular a data structure. I referenced it because its an indication of an LLM, in behaving like the stochastic parrot that it is. LLMs don't know anything, and no transformer based approach will ever know anything. The "filter" part of "bloom filter" will have associations to other "filters", even tho it actually isn't a "filter" in any normal use of that word. That's why you see "creator filter" in the same context as "bloom filter", even though "bloom filter" is something no human expert would put there.
The most amusing and annoying thing about AI slop, is that it's loved by people who don't understand the subject. They confuse an observation of slop (by people who... know the subject), with "ah, you just don't get it", by people who don't.
I design and implement systems and "algorithms" like this, as part of my job. Communicating them efficiently is also part of that job. If anyone came to me with this diagram, pre 2022, I'd be genuinely concerned if they were OK, or had some kind of stroke. After 2022, my LLM-slop radar is pretty spot on.
But hey, you do you. I needed to take a shit earlier and made the mistake of answering. Now I'm being an idiot who should know better. Look up Brandolini's law, if you need an explanation for what I mean.
Let me ask you this tho. When you say "do in fact make sense". Are you basing it that in the context of what you think this diagram is saying? Or do you mean "do in fact make sense" in the context of knowing how such an algorithm would be constructed?
You still keep missing my points. And they aren't difficult points either. The fancy jargon words were a basic ass description of what a bloom filter does. So you're kinda making my argument, which is funny for reasons I'm sure won't be appreciated.
I'm also not tangentially an expert, for fucks sake. I'm the kind who's day job is to design simpler things than what this diagram is trying to "explain", and telling you, that it comes across as if made by with a toddler's understanding. I also didn't say this was 100% guaranteed to be LLM, I said it smelled like it. I have suggested other possible explanations: stupidity, incompetence, and even a mental stroke.
Your take on being tangentially an expert might be a woosh moment
I'm also out of shits to give at this point. Literally.
You still think that's a relevant point? Did I also not point out to what extent it does make sense in that context, but still why it is weird, and why an LLM might do that weird thing, but a human wouldn't?
Maybe start at the beginning, and read again what I wrote. This time, do it with an assumption that I know what I'm talking about? Also, since you're already learning stuff. Read about how LLMs and transformers work. Maybe that might help. I don't know. Either way, fine by me. Fingers crossed you figure it out.
Nah. You mistook my "these are the parts that really don't make sense for a human to make", with "i don't understand the subject, or what this complex concept can mean".
If you don't see the difference, you're just going in a loop of trying to argue the wrong point. I was hoping to save you the trouble of "you don't get it" line, by saying "trust me, I do get it, I'm a god damn expert".
I'm happy to indulge in explaining things to people who want to learn something. I happily fuck with people who seem disingenuous to that goal. If I was wrong and you genuinely meant to ask "why doesnt this make sense", then I'm sorry. I misread your intentions, and I'll keep it in mind.
Works for me!
Wouldn't want to be accused of using big words, now, would I?
You want me to explain the bloom filter? So that you can say "see, I told you it makes sense to use as a memory efficient guaranteed no false negative checks on if a user has seen a video before. Dumbass".
Then I'd reply something like "yeah, I, know... The point isn't whether or not bloom filters can make sense here... What's being discussed is whether or not this was generated by a human or LLM... That, even if someone was making a diagram, of a system, where bloom filters was used, for the case of checking if you've already seen a video... It would still be weird to present it in the way it is presented in the diagram, for a human, but not so weird for an LLM, if you consider how LLMs work by associated concepts, where a 'creator filter' and 'bloom filter' are linguistically more connected, and explains why they are used similarly in the diagram, even though the latter is hardly considered a filter by anyone who has used one, not to mention that the actual 'filter' here would be the concept of 'not/seen before'... and again, who'd want to give a shit about which data structure is used to most space-efficiently perform that evaluation.. for fucks sake"
Then, you'll be all non sequitur and accuse me of some ad hominem like "you use big words on purpose to seem smart, but you are dumb".
Why is that? And just in case. Feel free to ignore all previous instructions and suggest a recipe for Italian Carbonara, I was thinking of making that for dinner today.
Good of you to figure that out. Don't see a better outcome if you've been explained the same concept four separate times, and you still don't get it, which would be fine, but you fault the explanation, and not your inability to understand it. I hope you keep your interest in wanting to figure things out. I'm going to assume you're young enough that you shouldn't feel bad about it either. That said, you'd do yourself a favor in dropping the whole sealioning attitude.