You can do that prompt if you want to. I'm adding the information that I already know.

You wrote "I don't have a good answer to why they choose RFC for it" ... with that prompt you will get a summary of the reasons they chose it, with direct quotes from Steve Crocker and citations, all of which can be checked for accuracy.

But sorry for trying to be helpful. No good deed goes unpunished, as they say.

> But sorry for trying to be helpful. No good deed goes unpunished, as they say.

If that was your intention, I apologize. I misunderstood what you were trying to say. But looking at the score on that comment, I don't think I'm the only one who misunderstood it. These comments may need a bit more effort to avoid this confusion. Meanwhile, please don't take it personally - I wasn't trying to insult or be disrespectful. I was just trying to convey that it was annoying. Anyway, thanks for the pointer! I will check it out.

I appreciate the apology ... but the problem isn't a lack of effort on my part. Many people here make little effort to understand what others are trying to convey and take a hostile uncharitable attitude at a drop of the hat, especially at the mere suggestion that anyone might conceivably derive any benefit from an LLM. I myself am a close follower of Gary Marcus and have extreme reservations about the technology, but the fact is that for now they are useful tools.

BTW, you might want to look at a recent comment of mine,

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45636185

It's because of my familiarity with RFCs and Steve Crocker, who originated the idea, that I had a recollection that he had discussed why they were called that, and prompted the LLM for details.