this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2025
31 points (87.8% liked)

No Stupid Questions

43508 readers
919 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

How an artificial intelligence (as in large language model based generative AI) could be better for information access and retrieval than an encyclopedia with a clean classification model and a search engine?

If we add a step of processing -- where a genAI "digests" perfectly structured data and tries, as bad as it can, to regurgitate things it doesn't understand -- aren't we just adding noise?

I'm talking about the specific use-case of "draw me a picture explaining how a pressure regulator works", or "can you explain to me how to code a recursive pattern matching algorithm, please".

I also understand how it can help people who do not want or cannot make the effort to learn an encyclopedia's classification plan, or how a search engine's syntax work.

But on a fundamental level, aren't we just adding an incontrolable step of noise injection in a decent time-tested information flow?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] XeroxCool@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Hopefully, it told you that's not a sign of a worn clutch. Assuming no computer interference and purely mechanical effects, then that's a sign the clutch is dragging. A worn clutch would provide more of an air gap with the pedal depressed than a fresh clutch. If you want to see a partial list of potential causes, see my reply to the other comment that replied to you.

Your questions are still not proof that LLMs are filling some void. If you think of a traditional encyclopedia, of course it's not going to know what the colors of one manufacturer's sandpapers mean. I'm sure that's answered somehow on their website or wherever you came across the two colors in the same grit and format. Chances are, if one is more expensive and doesn't have a defined difference in abrasive material, the pricier one is going to last longer by way of having stronger backing paper, better abrasive adhesive, and better resistance to clogging. Whether or not the price is necessary for your project is a different story. ChatGPT is reading the same info available to you. But if you don't understand the facts presented on the package, then how can you trust the LLM to tokenize it correctly to you?

Similarly, a traditional encyclopedia isn't going to have a direct answer to your clutch question, but, if it has thorough mechanical entries (with automotive specifics), you might be able to piece it together. You'd learn the "engine" spins in unison up to the flywheel, the flywheel is the mating surface for the clutch, the clutch pedal disengages the clutch from the flywheel, and that holding the pedal down for 5+ seconds should make the transmission input components spin down to a stop (even in neutral). You're trusting the LLM here to have a proper understanding of those linked mechanical devices. It doesn't. It's aggregating internet sources, buzzfeed style, and presenting anything it finds in a corrupted stream of tokens. Again, if you're not brought up to speed on how those components interact, then how do you know what it's saying is correct?

Obviously, the rebuttal is how can you trust anyone's answer if you're not already knowledgeable? Peer review is great for forums/social sites/wikipedias in the way of people correcting other comments. But beyond that, for formal informational sites, vetting places as a source - a skill being actively eroded with Google or ChatGPT "giving" answers. Neither are actually answering your questions. They're regurgitating things they found elsewhere. Remember, Google was happy to take reddit answers as fact and tell you elmers glue will hold cheese to pizza and cockroaches live in cocks. If you saw those answers with their high upvote count, you'd understand the nuance that reddit loves shitty sarcastic answers for entertainment value. LLMs don't because they, literally, don't understand anything. It's up to you to figure out if you should trust an algorithm-promoted Facebook page called "car hacks and facts" filled with bullshit videos. It's up to you to figure out if everythingcar. com is untrustworthy because it has vague, expansive wording and has more ad space than information.