[mras0]

Not sure why you're being downvoted. You need a to know quite a bit of esoteric knowledge to parse this beyond knowing x86 opcodes (even x86 assembly).

It's more or less the same information you get from the intel manuals (specifically appendix 2A of https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/t...). There you can also see what e.g. "Jb" means (a byte sized immediate following the instruction that specifies a sign-extended relative offset to the instruction).

One-byte opcodes here differs from 2 byte opcodes (386+ IIRC) prefixed by a 0F byte and even more convoluted stuff added later.

[charcircuit]

>Not sure why you're being downvoted.

I downvote people when they say they don't know what something is when they could have used a LLM to explain it to them.

[bigstrat2003]

So you would rather people ask a machine that is known to be unreliable and have no idea what it's talking about, than ask a forum of technically skilled people who will give them a good answer. That doesn't seem very reasonable to me.

[mras0]

The link is to an opcode map with strange abbreviations with no apparent explanation. Asking "What am I looking at?" without doing any research (with a LLM or otherwise) is entirely reasonable.

[Rietty]

What if the LLM gives them bad information and they don't know it? I personally would also just ask in a thread than risk the LLM info.

[jrockway]

I never punish people for asking a question. It's how you learn!

[sparkie]

You realize that LLMs are trained on human discussions right?

If everyone stops asking questions and asks the LLM instead, there is no new training data for future LLMs to learn from. They will stagnate, or consume their own slop, and regress.