To be fair an argument can be made for the Lego block one, using a novel combination of existing technologies to get better results is how nearly all innovation happens in machine learning.
this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2026
201 points (97.2% liked)
memes
18858 readers
2184 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Proving a thing that's only known empirically is extremely valuable, too. We've an enormous amount of evidence that the Riemann hypothesis is correct - we can produce an infinite amount of points on the line, in fact - but proving it is a different matter.
And for the kid challenging the 0.1% result, that’s about as close to pure scientific method as you can get.
Especially in ML too. It's currently easier to integrate multiple small specialised models than to train a big model for every use case. If I understand correctly, that was one of the main motivations for Anthropic developing the Model Context Protocol, including interacting with LLMs from front-end clients.
"Our model has no sense of permanence or real understanding of what words even mean and we re-interpreted this as the ability to lie."
I fucking loathe the term "compute". Every time one of these mealy-mouthed motherfuckers lets it slide through sphincter-like lips I want to kick some teeth in.
Your rage makes me feel seen. I share your feelings.
“We repeat the experiment with a newer dataset and act like we are the first doing this kind of experiment”
“We talk about possible applications in the future writing like your run-of-the-mill generalist newspaper”
“Another article resuming other articles”
Missing the Survey paper: Here’s the results of 5-10 other papers
Depending on the application case and benchmark, being 0.1 to 0.3 % better than other SOTA approaches can still be statistically highly significant. Even though such a number does notmlook like much, it can mean a large leap forward in practise.
Anyway, I wouod add a machine learning paper type that was written by an LLM and nobody cared to call that out in the peer review.