Challenge: I'll only switch to this brave new world of "LLM compilers" if the "spec language" is XML.
=)
Make it so, HN brain trust!
Challenge: I'll only switch to this brave new world of "LLM compilers" if the "spec language" is XML.
=)
Make it so, HN brain trust!
i'd postulate this: most people see llms as tools for thought. programmers also see llms as tools for programming. some programmers, right now, are getting very good at both, and are binding the two together.
I'm not disagreeing, as you might very well be right, but... why exactly do you think this is written by LLM? I couldn't find any obvious giveaways myself.
I see this kind of weird pacing and dumb "it's not X, it's Y" stuff ALL the time with slop posts on LinkedIn. Classic LLM tells.
My gosh, this bubble can't burst soon enough. It's a form of torture to keep waiting on the pain we all know is coming…
“We are launching our own Rebel Star to blow up planets which support the Empire. It’s totally better than the Death Star and not unethical at all. Join us to build a better future for the galaxy!”
You know what would happen if all the people who handwrote and maintained those libraries revoked their code from the training datasets and forbid their use by the models?
:clown face emoji:
This LLM-maxxing is always a myopic one-way argument. The LLMs steal logic from the humans who invent it, then people claim those humans are no longer required. Yet, in the end, it's humans all the way down. It's never not.