Comment by djoldman
[flagged]
[flagged]
Sometimes understanding the gist of certain events/topics can be more useful than spending valuable minutes delving very deep into the event/topic.
Makes me wonder if back in the early 2000 people went around the forums posting "I didn't read the linked article, but putting the title into Google gave me this: ...". Seriously, what's the point of this? We know that most LLMs has the whole of English Wikipedia baked into them (IIRC it constitutes the bulk of the training data for pretty much all of them), and that they can recall it more or less correctly, thank you very much.
> whole of English Wikipedia baked into them (IIRC it constitutes the bulk of the training data for pretty much all of them)
Not a dig on anything you are saying (because I agree that just shoving a link into an LLM and asking for a summary is a horrendous stand-in for learning), but worth correcting that wikipedia is a very small fraction (certainly under 1%) of the training corpus for LLMs these days.
> Seriously, what's the point of this?
A straightforward, accurate, explanation for the eponymous headline.
I don't care about the lore related to Gauss. I read that in school and promptly forgot most of it. This article won't resonate with me, except to attribute the heptadecagon with Gauss in a nebulous way. Maybe I'll even remember what his proof was for, in a few years.
Which reduces it to trivia. whereas if you read the article you can learn (or refresh yourself) about a number of interesting geometric properties. That's more fun for me.