Derek_Stewart wrote: Sat Dec 28, 2024 7:48 pm Hi,
I agree with all the above points, in fact Qview same issues are stated in the Minerva Manual, in the Hatemail section:
Screenshot_20241228_194444_ReadEra.jpg
same issues 30 years ago



Derek_Stewart wrote: Sat Dec 28, 2024 7:48 pm Hi,
I agree with all the above points, in fact Qview same issues are stated in the Minerva Manual, in the Hatemail section:
Screenshot_20241228_194444_ReadEra.jpg
same issues 30 years ago
I think part of it is that more recently Google has added AI which, when you ask, tries to summarize to give you an answer. Unfortunately you can't always trust the answer (*** example below), but for some, if they like that feature and accept it, it's easier than sifting through search results (I find my students doing this more and more now) I would think maybe eventually as search changes with AI expected as an integral part of it, this could also proliferate to forums like this.dilwyn wrote: Fri Dec 27, 2024 10:17 am ...
One reason people ask instead of searching here on the Forum is that the search (even the advanced search) is so hopeless at returning results relevant to what you search for. Even using search engines, I wish they had an "exact match" option so that the 99% of irrelevant results were eliminated, even if it often resulted in zero search results. Simple example: Try forcing Gongle to search for sinclair ql with a search such as "sinclair"+"ql" and 99% of what is returned has more to do with SQL or the Brother QL label printers than what you searched for. Despite putting words in quotes and using operators to try to specify exactly what you're looking for. Perhaps this sort of thing puts people off searching for themselves. I hate "fuzzy searches". And it's often worse with AI systems because they try to be too clever sometimes.
...
My point was more like why can't the search engine providers give the option of simple EXACT MATCHES. Fuzzy searches and AI results have their uses but they rarely give good results.bwinkel67 wrote: Sat Dec 28, 2024 9:26 pm I think part of it is that more recently Google has added AI which, when you ask, tries to summarize to give you an answer. Unfortunately you can't always trust the answer (*** example below), but for some, if they like that feature and accept it, it's easier than sifting through search results (I find my students doing this more and more now) I would think maybe eventually as search changes with AI expected as an integral part of it, this could also proliferate to forums like this.
Hey PJW...pjw wrote: Wed Dec 25, 2024 11:36 pm Why not just use WMON ,x, y instead of all those lines of code?
When I first got a nice 26" HDMI monitor for my main computer some yearsNL_QL_Usr wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 10:22 amHey PJW...pjw wrote: Wed Dec 25, 2024 11:36 pm Why not just use WMON ,x, y instead of all those lines of code?
Nice tip
Tried it and it works good!!![]()
Although I hardly ever use a bigger resolution.
sitting lazy almost lying on a comfortable chair ..... an a distance from the QL
The "old" QLscreen is very readable![]()
Because it isn't AI, its just regurgitating what some idiot wrote!Unfortunately you can't always trust the answer
It is AI in the traditional sense where you basically create an expert system that looks up facts and tries to deduce them. The problem is, people have confused what AI is with real intelligence since these massive AI language models can sound more,and more real, even though sometimes the facts they spew are incorrect. It reminds me of a recent post on the QL Facebook group where someone touts a mid 80s Sinclair QL article on AI and proudly states how advanced the QL was back then. Well, we had chess games prior to that, as just one example. In fact, that same year Tim Hartnell came out with his book "Artificial Intelligence on the QL" and in one example he goes into how you can use matches in a matchbook to simulate learning, since it's just a weight-based system.XorA wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 6:26 pmBecause it isn't AI, its just regurgitating what some idiot wrote!Unfortunately you can't always trust the answer
The trouble is the training sets for these LLMs are well known to be utterly broken. Like they train them on AO3 and wonder why they all become nazi sex offenders.........bwinkel67 wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 9:21 pmIt is AI in the traditional sense where you basically create an expert system that looks up facts and tries to deduce them. The problem is, people have confused what AI is with real intelligence since these massive AI language models can sound more,and more real, even though sometimes the facts they spew are incorrect. It reminds me of a recent post on the QL Facebook group where someone touts a mid 80s Sinclair QL article on AI and proudly states how advanced the QL was back then. Well, we had chess games prior to that, as just one example. In fact, that same year Tim Hartnell came out with his book "Artificial Intelligence on the QL" and in one example he goes into how you can use matches in a matchbook to simulate learning, since it's just a weight-based system.XorA wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2024 6:26 pmBecause it isn't AI, its just regurgitating what some idiot wrote!Unfortunately you can't always trust the answer
I think the one interesting element is, if you query this expert system enough, the inferencing of "what idiots say" gets better. There was a study that found that if you have people independently guessing something (I think this particular study was guessing the weight of a cow), that the average of all guesses was pretty close to being accurate) and so that's kind of the power of these massive language model systems.
My setups come from adapting a high resolution SMS2 system I used a long time ago ago.One man's setup is, i'm sure, as good as another's, but unless i'm made aware
of a better one, I prefer my own