From Newsgroup: comp.ai.philosophy

Dear alt.usage.english,
comp.ai.philosophy,

The L.L.Ms. are stupid. Never forget that. I was wondering, when the
same king ruled both Iceland, and Sweden. I made the naive question to
the search engine as follows.

when was iceland part of sweden

And the /search assist/ answer that came back was

Iceland was never part of Sweden; it was under Norwegian rule from
1262/64 and then Danish rule from 1380 until it became independent in
1944.

which may or may not be correct, I haven't checked yet. Then I asked

when was the same king ruling both denmark and sweden

and the /search assist/ answer that came back was

The same monarch ruled both Denmark and Sweden during the Kalmar Union
period, such as King John, who reigned over Denmark (1481rCo1513),
Norway (1483rCo1513), and Sweden (1497rCo1501).

which also may or may not be correct, I haven't checked either.

Anyway, a human insufferable know-it-all could have corrected my ques-
tion, and followed up with an /achtually/ stating that we are merely
talking about four years, from fourteen hundred and ninety seven to fif-
teen hundred and one [1].

Now, the members of comp.ai.philosophy, who believe the L.L.Ms. are not
only insufferable know-it-alls, but also stochastically correct, will
have to explain to me, in details, how this can be corrected once and
for all. That is, this mistake must not happen again, with /any/ L.L.M.
home trained or not. It stands to reason, that once something is poin-
ted out to be wrong to an L.L.M., it has to be possible to teach all of
them forever. No matter who is doing the training, and with what bud-
get.

Because once this is corrected, we also know how to correct for all fu-
ture L.L.Ms. any misunderstanding, forever. And we can be safe to ass-
ume that the people training L.L.Ms. are all reasonable and well meaning
people who will make sure all past mistakes are not forgotten, and no L.
L.M. will be trained on incorrect data, forever.


Best wishes, and happy L.L.M. training!


[1] Members of alt.usage.english are welcome to correct my counting of
the years.
--
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.ai.philosophy

On 30/09/2026 22:51, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:

Dear alt.usage.english,
-a-a-a-a comp.ai.philosophy,

The L.L.Ms. are stupid.-a Never forget that.-a I was wondering, when the
same king ruled both Iceland, and Sweden.-a I made the naive question to
the search engine as follows.

Johann, you do realise that LLMs are populated with human knowledge,
right? It's text ('knowledge') generated by humans. So, LLMs are no
stupider than their input. (I am side-stepping the delicate issue of
humans who ask these questions of AIs, rather than researching their
questions the long-hand method.)

-a when was iceland part of sweden

And the /search assist/ answer that came back was

-a Iceland was never part of Sweden; it was under Norwegian rule from
-a 1262/64 and then Danish rule from 1380 until it became independent in
-a 1944.

which may or may not be correct, I haven't checked yet.-a Then I asked

-a when was the same king ruling both denmark and sweden

and the /search assist/ answer that came back was

-a The same monarch ruled both Denmark and Sweden during the Kalmar Union
-a period, such as King John, who reigned over Denmark (1481rCo1513),
-a Norway (1483rCo1513), and Sweden (1497rCo1501).

which also may or may not be correct, I haven't checked either.

Anyway, a human insufferable know-it-all could have corrected my ques-
tion, and followed up with an /achtually/ stating that we are merely
talking about four years, from fourteen hundred and ninety seven to fif-
teen hundred and one [1].

Now, the members of comp.ai.philosophy, who believe the L.L.Ms. are not
only insufferable know-it-alls, but also stochastically correct, will
have to explain to me, in details, how this can be corrected once and
for all.-a That is, this mistake must not happen again, with /any/ L.L.M. home trained or not.-a It stands to reason, that once something is poin-
ted out to be wrong to an L.L.M., it has to be possible to teach all of
them forever.-a No matter who is doing the training, and with what bud-
get.

Because once this is corrected, we also know how to correct for all fu-
ture L.L.Ms. any misunderstanding, forever.-a And we can be safe to ass-
ume that the people training L.L.Ms. are all reasonable and well meaning people who will make sure all past mistakes are not forgotten, and no L.
L.M. will be trained on incorrect data, forever.

Best wishes, and happy L.L.M. training!

[1] Members of alt.usage.english are welcome to correct my counting of
the years.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.ai.philosophy

Den 30.09.2026 kl. 22.51 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:

-a when was the same king ruling both denmark and sweden

and the /search assist/ answer that came back was

-a The same monarch ruled both Denmark and Sweden during the Kalmar Union
-a period, such as King John, who reigned over Denmark (1481rCo1513),
-a Norway (1483rCo1513), and Sweden (1497rCo1501).

We have never had a king named "John" or any other name that might be represented as "John". The first king of the Kalmar Union was formally
Erik af Pommern who was son of Margrete 1st, and it was in reality her
that ruled.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.ai.philosophy

On 01/10/26 17:33, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

Den 30.09.2026 kl. 22.51 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:

when was the same king ruling both denmark and sweden

and the /search assist/ answer that came back was

The same monarch ruled both Denmark and Sweden during the Kalmar
Union period, such as King John, who reigned over Denmark
(1481rCo1513), Norway (1483rCo1513), and Sweden (1497rCo1501).

We have never had a king named "John" or any other name that might be
represented as "John". The first king of the Kalmar Union was
formally Erik af Pommern who was son of Margrete 1st, and it was in
reality her that ruled.

Google calls him Charles XIV John, and he was a Bernadotte. But that's
the wrong historical period. Delete that guess.

Ah, here's the right one. Hans, King of Denmark, sometimes called John
or Johannes.

If it helps, England once had a King John.

King John was not a good man
He had his little ways
And sometimes no-one spoke to him
For days and days and days.
--
Peter Moylan peter@pmoylan.org http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.ai.philosophy

Den 01.10.2026 kl. 10.24 skrev Peter Moylan:

We have never had a king named "John" or any other name that might be
-arepresented as "John". The first king of the Kalmar Union was
formally Erik af Pommern who was son of Margrete 1st, and it was in
reality her that ruled.

Google calls him Charles XIV John, and he was a Bernadotte. But that's
the wrong historical period. Delete that guess.

He was not king of Denmark.

Ah, here's the right one. Hans, King of Denmark, sometimes called John
or Johannes.

Sorry, I didn't know that. I've only seen the name "Hans". Yes, he has
ruled all three countries for four years.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.ai.philosophy

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote or quoted: >Anyway, a human insufferable know-it-all could have corrected my ques-

tion, and followed up with an /achtually/ stating that we are merely
talking about four years, from fourteen hundred and ninety seven to fif-
teen hundred and one [1].

OTOH, more than once I got answers where the model apparently
tried to guess my intend, and I had to write in the next prompt,

|Please answer my question literally.


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.ai.philosophy

On 10/1/2026 2:27 PM, occam wrote:

Dear alt.usage.english,
-a-a-a-a comp.ai.philosophy,

The L.L.Ms. are stupid.-a Never forget that.-a I was wondering, when the
same king ruled both Iceland, and Sweden.-a I made the naive question to
the search engine as follows.

Johann, you do realise that LLMs are populated with human knowledge,
right? It's text ('knowledge') generated by humans. So, LLMs are no
stupider than their input. (I am side-stepping the delicate issue of
humans who ask these questions of AIs, rather than researching their questions the long-hand method.)

Dear occam,

My point was that when the "A.I." /knows/ two different points of a
factiod [1] it still cannot /connect the dots/ to make an overall ass-
essment to answer a larger question.

Unlike a human insufferable know-it-all.



Best wishes, and happy A.I. queries!

[1] Yes, I consider /factoid/ to be a valid word here.
--
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via XS News https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.ai.philosophy

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote or quoted:

My point was that when the "A.I." /knows/ two different points of a
factiod [1] it still cannot /connect the dots/ to make an overall ass- >essment to answer a larger question.

Unlike a human insufferable know-it-all.

On December 14, 2023, Google DeepMind's FunSearch paired a large
language model with an automated evaluator to solve an open
challenge in extremal combinatorics by discovering the largest known
mathematical constructions for the cap set problem. - It bypassed
traditional brute-force limits by connecting the dots between
algorithmic computer science and high-dimensional vector space
geometry, mapping code generation outputs directly onto abstract
geometric spaces that human intuitive leaps had failed to bridge.

In September 2026, Anthropic's Claude solved a decades-old
"holy grail" problem in probability theory by producing a
formally verified Lean proof that resolves the dying percolation
conjecture (\theta(p_c) = 0) for dimensions 3 through 10. - The
model connected the dots by using truths from algebraic topology,
specifically persistent homology, to analyze infinite path spaces
in statistical mechanics, revealing macro-level phase geometric
invariants that probability experts could not mathematically link.

On September 8, 2026, OpenAI's unreleased next-generation multi-agent
system tackled the 90-year-old Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness
Millennium Problem by generating a 166-page analytical proof that
demonstrates how a singularity can form in an initially smooth fluid
flow. - It connected the dots by applying discrete number theory
and arithmetic dynamics to complex fluid mechanics, recognizing a
hidden structural symmetry in prime-factor bounds that governs the
exact chaotic behavior of non-linear differential equations, dots
which human experts failed to connect before.


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.ai.philosophy

On 10/1/2026 5:27 PM, Stefan Ram wrote:

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote or quoted:

Anyway, a human insufferable know-it-all could have corrected my ques-
tion, and followed up with an /achtually/ stating that we are merely
talking about four years, from fourteen hundred and ninety seven to fif-
teen hundred and one [1].

OTOH, more than once I got answers where the model apparently
tried to guess my intend, and I had to write in the next prompt,

|Please answer my question literally.

Dear Stefan,

Usually, when that happens to me, it seems to want to make up the quest-
ion. As in, answer something completely different. Sometimes, when I
ask a search engine for a definition of a word, the /ai assist/ will de-
fine a completely different word.

So I have trained myself never to read the /ai assist/ summary when ask-
ing a dictionary, and always click merriam-webster, oxford, cambridge,
or some other well known human-edited dictionary.

If you think /define a completely different word/ is a valid answer,
I'll point out the we are humans, and sometimes only read the definition
and don't always re-read what we wrote; meaning, /what word is the ai
assistant defining/, we just wrote it. Putting it in a different font
or enlarge the word-under-definition just makes us skip that part hard-
er.

And people who don't understand this, that the ai can simply answer
something completely different, or use outdated references [1] such as
an article on the wrong version of Drupal [3] will forever wade in error
and confusion through life [5]. I mean, that's just as bad as getting a
quote from Python 2.7 when you're trying to do something extra-Pythonic
in 3.17 [6].

So we live in a world, where the media controlled gaslighting is always
telling us the ai is great, that the ai knows best, and that we should
all be using ai for everything, when in fact the ai is completely stupid
and cannot be made to understand it should be able to connect the dots
and know -- at least the basics -- that the Kalmar Union existed, and
that it included both Iceland and Sweden at the same time -- here is a Wikipedia article with a map,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalmar_Union

which I have not personally verified -- even though I'm not asking it
about the Kalmar Union by name. You know, completely differently from
an insufferable human know-it-all.

Then the insufferable know-it-all humans of Usenet are trying to tell us
the ai is great? I mean, how insufferable is that? I don't know what
the people of comp.ai.philosophy are thinking, because this is not OK.
It is not OK to gaslight regular people who don't know better that they
should be paying ai tokens to Sam Altman, rather than just read physical
books themselves, and become the insufferable know-it-all.


Best wishes, and happy suffering from insufferable know-it-alls of Use-
net!

[1] Consider the following Wikipedia article,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracy

which has the following quotation from an outdated but publicly availa-
ble article titled /Scribal Training in Ancient Egypt/,

Similarly, Ancient Egypt had a hereditary class of scribes that
administered a civil-service bureaucracy.[18]

and you can read it here,

https://www.jstor.org/stable/600648?origin=crossref

which I haven't, to be honest. On the other hand, this guy,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Brier

and

https://drbobbrier.com/about-bob-brier

taught me in a video course [I won't name the exact episode] that
any-body with intelligence could become a scribe, and confirmed it in a pri- vate correspondence [2]. I have however decided not to get into an edit
war with the Wikipedia editors, and have left the article incorrect. It
would be more correct to leave out the sentence entirely.

[2] Paraphrasing the librarian from The Mummy (1999), /take that you
Wikipedia editors/.

[3] As far as I know, there's no comp.lang.drupal, but I've included comp.lang.misc for a few programmers so they can read this monologue as
well, and be illuminated about the fact they can't trust the A.I. tuto-
rials, because it can be teaching the wrong version of the programming
language [4].

[4] Which also begs the question, should we try to start comp.lang.php,
or leave that up to the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas?

[5] Here I am paraphrasing an Icelandic expression, and people from alt. usage.english can suggest a better one.

[6] I have however decided not to include comp.lang.python in this
discussion, since all programmers already read comp.lang.misc for Rust
because comp.lang.rust is still under consideration by news.groups.pro-
posals.
--
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2