<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>On the Semantics of Large Language Models · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2507.05448/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2507.05448/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>On the Semantics of Large Language Models — mentioned by CrackerNews</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45923243</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2507.05448:45923243</guid><pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2025 02:37:01 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;You cannot be serious if you expect people to mind read through your typos and make sense of them. Is this supposed to be a performative art piece to demonstrate your point? If you actually care about expressing your point to another person, then you should show some attention over how you present your responses so the other person can understand it. Is &amp;quot;task demand&amp;quot; what the LLM would expect to do in order to respond to the user prompt? It seems incredulous that semantics would only exist here. As I have mentioned before, semantics is already embedded in the input and output for the LLM to…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2507.05448/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CL</category></item></channel></rss>
