Languages as designed latent spaces
It’s also work that an LLM cannot do: they are symbol manipulators, not creators of symbols. This is something that really irks me when I see the word "novel" used to describe an output of a LLM. No, those things are not capable of actually doing anything novel, because novelty implies new symbols, not a less common combination of the existing ones.
- ▪It’s also work that an LLM cannot do: they are symbol manipulators, not creators of symbols.
- ▪This is something that really irks me when I see the word "novel" used to describe an output of a LLM.
- ▪No, those things are not capable of actually doing anything novel, because novelty implies new symbols, not a less common combination of the existing ones.
2 outlets in our directory ran this story, first to last over 13 hours. All of the coverage we found sits in one bucket: centre. That one-sidedness is itself worth noticing.
- ▪ Languages as designed latent spaces — Jsbarretto
Comments - RSS 2.0 files mainly under programming. We currently carry 20 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Story provenance
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | Lobsters |
| Canonical URL | https://lobste.rs/c/jj8obh |
| Publication time | Sat, 25 Jul 2026 14:45:24 -0500 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-07-25T21:18:45.334Z |
| Last seen | 2026-07-25T21:18:45.334Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | bR5hwO_OxOAK · 2 stories |
| Cluster logic | Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
It’s also work that an LLM cannot do: they are symbol manipulators, not creators of symbols. This is something that really irks me when I see the word "novel" used to describe an output of a LLM. No, those things are not capable of actually doing anything novel, because novelty implies new symbols, not a less common combination of the existing ones.
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Lobsters.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Lobsters
