this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2025
33 points (88.4% liked)

Technology

73534 readers
3767 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 55 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I bet I could do that too, hallucinate some bullshit that seems like it could fit in the gaps.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Who knew this inscription was about "Biggus Dickus" all along?

[–] jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Does it also mention his wife, Incontonentia Buttocks?

[–] ThePyroPython@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

What about Naughtimus Maximus?

[–] prex@aussie.zone 13 points 1 week ago

Who knew the Romans were such big fans of squarespace?

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It isn't quite as crazy as it sounds when you consider that a lot of inscription texts are pretty formulaic—epitaphs, dedications, and such. Plus, we have plenty of surviving writings in classical Latin, so we know the grammar pretty well. Given those things, I'd expect an AI trained on the corpus of inscription texts that have survived without significant damage to be able to make reasonable suggestions about formulaic texts.

Really, when you think about it, a trained human presented with a damaged inscription text won't be doing anything much different from what an LLM would do: they'll try to fill in the text with the most likely words based on any remaining traces of letters, and their knowledge of other, similar texts. The problem is getting the LLM to communicate its level of certainty about the fill-ins it's offering.

[–] FishFace@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

That and (at least for now) it may be difficult to communicate contextual information to an LLM that a human historian or philologist may be able to take in implicitly.

[–] isodimensional@aussie.zone 3 points 1 week ago

This has actually been done for quite a long time. Roman historians could look up common words in databases from partial words and get a pretty good guess at the overall inscription from context.

[–] qwestjest78@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago

What a joke

[–] db2@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Neque porro quisquam est qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit.