Thankfully you were here to make sure we didn’t forget about it for even one post
replyThey have a Machine Learning section on the front page. Just have to scroll down a bit, under the "Use Elixir for" section.
replyI don't think Machine Learning falls under what most people consider "AI" and "LLM" these days, even if they're technically intertwined.
replyMachine learning used to be used as a buzzword alongside AI, though nowadays after the release of ChatGPT it seems they've settled on AI.
replyMachine learning used to be considered a subset of AI. AI encompassed any algorithms that exhibited "intelligence" (e.g. a chess engine), while machine learning was scoped to algorithms that required training (e.g. a neural network).
replyHow is LLM (a particular area of machine learning) not machine learning? Have people already forgotten the basis for LLMs?
replyThe majority of people who use LLMs today never even heard of ML though a non-trivial percentage have heard that modern AI is powered by LLM. You can’t forget what you never knew. Such is the evolution of language when a formerly niche technical concept crosses the chasm to mass awareness.
replyI'd argue there's a qualitative difference between using machine learning for specific data analysis tasks, and using a generic agentic AI system controlled by some corporate entity. The association of the term 'AI' with the latter is increasing.
replyYes, but nozzlegear claims that even technically "intertwined" (presumably they mean "inclined") people don't know the connection between LLMs and the broader ML work that encompasses it. That's a pretty big claim, and would be rather shocking if true. ML and deep learning were heavily invested in and discussed through the 2010s (and earlier, but the hardware developments at the end of the 2000s enabled the ML boom of the 2010s), is our industry really so memory constrained (I know there's a shortage now, but still) that people don't know the connection between machine learning and LLMs?
reply> but nozzlegear claims that even technically "intertwined" (presumably they mean "inclined") people
replySorry, I meant the subjects (LLMs, ML, AI) are intertwined, not the people. But what I was getting at with my comment is that (IMO) most people see them as distinct things, even on HN where most know that LLMs use ML. As an analogy, it's like physics versus mathematics: separate subjects in most everyone's mind, and even separate academic departments, but physics is still math.
Your meaning was clear ... Jtsummers bizarrely misparsed it.
replyBut I bet the landing page was made with AI assistance.
replyIt was not: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48959936
reply>I also worked on all of the copy myself, collecting feedback from core maintainers as I went. The new tagline was a suggestion from Theo which we iterated on. I did use LLMs as an assistant, but I did not ask it to generate the content.
reply>Might as well use LLMs for the whole thing next time, since we will be accused of doing so anyway! :D
It certainly looks like a Claude design to some extent; not all they way however.
replyIt feels less sloppy than most obviously AI generated landing pages.
replyThe only sloppy aspects that stand out to me are the needless animations/transitions.