We had that before. It's called a search engine and delivers better and more balanced results.
On any political topic you can educate yourself faster by using Google and Wikipedia rather than read a stilted and wrong response from an LLM.
If you are willing to steal code, plunder GitHub directly and strip the license rather than have an LLM launder it for you.
So many "new" technologies just enable losers who rely on them for their income. "Social coding" websites enable bureaucrats to infiltrate projects, do almost nothing but still get the required amounts of green squares in order to appear productive.
LLMs enable idiots to sound somewhat profound, hence the popularity and the evangelism. I'm not even sure if Planck would have liked LLMs or recognized them as important.
Personally I have my own set of beliefs on the use of LLMs, but I think you're even more cynical than me. In any case, Planck's sentiment cuts both ways. It is not necessarily the case that some change necessitates progress, but of course we tend to point out progress over things that are neutral or regress, so that is a bias or fallacy in how we normally perceive progress. If tomorrow it was conclusively shown that LLMs have some meaningful upper bound, it would behoove LLM adorers to similarly be accepting of that disappointing news. It's fine and expected for people to display a variety of opinions on a topic. I just ask that we all strive to understand each other and promote collective progress, whether that means adopting or rejecting something.
On any political topic you can educate yourself faster by using Google and Wikipedia rather than read a stilted and wrong response from an LLM.
If you are willing to steal code, plunder GitHub directly and strip the license rather than have an LLM launder it for you.
So many "new" technologies just enable losers who rely on them for their income. "Social coding" websites enable bureaucrats to infiltrate projects, do almost nothing but still get the required amounts of green squares in order to appear productive.
LLMs enable idiots to sound somewhat profound, hence the popularity and the evangelism. I'm not even sure if Planck would have liked LLMs or recognized them as important.
reply