- add lint or errors, otherwise your formatting will break, e.g. LLMs and humans will add text too long or too short and your design system will not be able to handle this.
- it's great for low token input
- validate the layout of the user vs. the components used.
You have gone the full latex route. very interesting project. my purpose was simple, to keep mdv extremely simple nothing complex. I do not want full html/latex replication and for surely no inline code...
Absolutely. You got the joke, or? This was the main point of the full article. No primary sources. Only unverified aggregates. Strong contrast to what I did normally once per month.
> Variable paragraph lengths
I tried to compare it to the URL you posted. It's quite similar. I would have rather have said. Shorter sentences. Shorter Paragraphs. But let's not fight on this ;)
IMHO LLMs cannot provide statistically confident measures, and they are terrible at pretending to be capable of doing so.
What worked: You use an OCR that provides character/word-level bounding boxes and let the LLM extract from data. Then the LLM is capable of "calculating" a confidence of extracted data.
Speaking about "that the state of the art tools", might be 6 months or 20 years old. Surfaced opinions might rely on software that a company licensed 2 years ago. Sadly, we need to take this enterprise speed of adaptation into account.
I found only a few that correct OCR by using LLM. I think it feels too risky.
Think of an LLM that corrects 898,00 to 888,00. It feels like the David Kriesel Xerox case. Still, it's an interesting way to think of the issue of optical character recognition.
The relevant term is "bounding box", as you probably need the confidence level of a character or word, not just the image. I built such an interface. I think the effort is only worth it if you really have multi-millions of pages.
Pretty balanced take. I think if a human gains information or saves time, it's still worthwhile. Surely, I don't publish those clickbaits. That's AI slop.
How else do you think I would have come to write this comment? I got to the second major heading before realizing that there is little human input in this document.
I use LLMs but I will never impose on Claude's intellectual musings on another person as some sort of intellectual insight.
This is about the same as copying someone else's homework and then presenting the copied work as an example of deep brilliance. The copying isn't great, but the boasting is absurd. Who are we trying to con?
I think I made it obvious what the article is about: no boasting, not "copying someone else's homework". Which text did you last publish? Can you be more specific? I would be genuinely interested in specific changes you would do if you were the editor.
> I mean "a" text! I was just curious how you write. Do you prefer to write comments?
In all fairness, I've been accused of sounding like an LLM this year, which is quite unfortunate as I think we're coming to the end of careful writing.
reply