On Wed, 27 May 2026, 9:29 am Qian Yun, <[email protected]> wrote: > On 5/26/26 11:00 PM, Tim Daly wrote: > > Even more amusing is that I have written several programs recently > > using Claude Code. I haven't even looked at the generated source code. > > Indeed one of the systems now just generates binary without code. > > So clearly I have no idea what I'm talking about. History is harsh. :-) > > > > The goal these days is to communicate from machine to machine > > not human to human. The task is to create "skills", essentially > > sets of prompts that focus the LLMs attention and indicate goals > > for agents. For example, > > https://github.com/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity <https://github.com/ > > human-avatar/skills-for-humanity> > > > What about machine to human? > > Do you think LLMs can understand Axiom? Can it help people > to complete the goal of document Axiom in literature programming > style? So that humans can understand Axiom completely? >
LLMs understand nothing and never can. At best, these systems are partial pattern recognisers and at worse the results are garbage. What we see today is the same effect that occurred when database technology became common. People of all stripes including DBAs and other technical people had a trust of the technology which was unwarranted. I have spent many many years having to analyse software systems and the vast majority are, how shall I put this, not doing what they are supposed to be designed for. The results obtained may appear to be correct. However, on deep analysis of the code base, one realises that the results obtained aren't real. If one using any LLM has a detailed understanding of the code related to the specific LLM system, one can use that system somewhat effectively. Otherwise, one will face certain problems with whatever is produced. I have found that subject matter experts are not necessarily au fait with the problems of the systems they use or build and trust those systems more than they should. Mind you, most non-subject matter experts are worse in the trust they have for these systems. One should trust these systems like you would a politician or a used car salesman or anyone trying to sell you a bridge in New York City. I am not saying that one should never use these systems, but be very very very careful about trusting the results obtained. Check and recheck the results very very thoroughly before accepting those results. > > - Qian > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "FriCAS - computer algebra system" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/fricas-devel/2ee4746e-e977-4145-a7d1-9eabc6df83e5%40gmail.com > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FriCAS - computer algebra system" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/fricas-devel/CAEnaMTGw6FpGs1MQTCCZxxRwqh30YP4xb31ijzsW%3D5%3Dahc%3DuEA%40mail.gmail.com.
