Fuck these headlines.
We know this isn't about LLMs, but clearly the intent of newspapers and their backers is to make the general public believe it is.
this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2026
69 points (74.8% liked)
Technology
85873 readers
4195 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Nah, this story has been developing since before the LLM boom. "AI" has never been rare in science headlines like this.
Yeah but now the meaning of the word AI has changed in most people's minds to mean generative ai and mostly LLMs.
Well, apparently journalists here are doing a good job and actually understand that generative AI and machine learning models pertain to the same family of techniques.
I wouldn't call that "doing a good job". If they were doing a good job, they would disambiguate Machine Learning from Generative AI. I don't know that they're doing this intentionally, but i would definitely appreciate that distinction being made.
I work in the field of machine learning as a researcher. There is no distinction. Machine learning is a set of techniques, Artificial Intelligence is a synonym which became popular in recent years.
Generative AI only defines how a model is used, not what the model is. You might as well use a kNN model to do generative AI. Generative AI is machine learning. More specifically it is an application of supervised machine learning.
Some people have started distinguishing machine learning to identify classical models and AI to definite stuff that uses deep learning.
If you want to be specific you may use the name of the specific model, but that's a bit too much for an article title. Otherwise, the term AI is quite appropriate in this context and far more recognized than ML.
And me myself never say AI, I don't like too much that it ingrains some feeling of intelligence; but for these articles i feel it is appropriate.
As someone else who works in ML but as a user for research purposes, I agree that there is no technical distinction but we're talking about public communications here. You and I both know that AI and ML are the same thing. Most people do not. If I talked with my mom about AI she would assume I mean generative AI. She wouldn't understand the nuance in your comment.
In fact, even as a researcher who uses both simple ML techniques and generative AI, I tend to make the assumption that when someone mentions AI they mean generative AI.
Common language changes based on the common understanding of society. The fact that the technical terms mean something different from the common understanding in society means that we need to be even more careful with the terms that we use, especially with something as polarizing as generative AI.
We have a different opinion here. I don't think general public has an understanding of the difference between the two things. It may be useful to teach people about it, but I'm not sure how much it would help. People understand generative AI when they hear AI because it's been the only thing they've been in direct contact with. Despite them using ML every day in different aspects of their life this is not something they get to know about. LLMs are different since they directly use the model.
I feel it is good people are getting to know ML and the fact that it is a useful technology; the fact that currently it is associated with LLMs is a side effect. It probably would be better if it wasn't that way, but I do not see it as a big problem.
On the fact that it is polarizing, sure that is currently the case; probably it won't be so in 10 years. That is nothing compared to the past 70 years in which ML has been used and applied in several fields with great success without anyone knowing it even existed.
Actual AI, learning models, not large language models hallucinating things.
Exactly. The fact that "AI" has now been almost completely associated with LLMs is incredibly frustrating.
So this is more of machine learning than AI?
AI is the larger umbrella term. LLMs, Machine Learning, CNNs, DNNs, RNNs, etc. all fall under that umbrella "AI" term.
Yeah, even pathfinding is "AI" but people associate it only with slop these days.
Like some Dunning Kruger effect sweeping the world.
Well when they said the Pentagon was using AI to help coordinate the attacks on Iran, I simply assumed it was some expert system with a machine learning component. But no, it turns out they were using Grok, an actual LLM chatbot. Which is fucking crazy.
So sometimes the assumption goes the other way as well.
load more comments
(13 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(14 replies)
"We've been trying to reach you about your cars extended warranty..."
Do you want to awaken ancient Italian zombie hoardes? Because this is how you awaken ancient Italian zombie hoardes.
Does it have a load of em dashes in the text?
it’s not just a load of em dashes, it’s also a…
Didn’t this happen years ago? I remember them doing the same thing using some heuristic algorithm long before llms were on the scene.
The article never mentioned LLMs. LLMs only make up a small part of all AI tools. The AI in this sense is referring to machine learning models used to help digitally unroll the scroll and then another machine learning model that's used to detect the letters.
It's a continuation of work started in 2023.
There have been numerous developments in recent years but this latest one [...] is a “historic breakthrough,” according to those involved.
Ah, that makes sense. Maybe i read an earlier article where they had only partially recovered.
"The text appears to be a philosophical discussion of ethics, arts and human behavior, probably reflecting Stoic thought, the researchers say. "
If I recall correctly, that's consistent with the other scrolls from that library that have been deciphered by different methods, so at least some of the text is likely to be correct.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
"Dear diary, boy I sure hope that volcano doesn't erupt."
view more: next ›