3 ms·
I actually wish that no one took the llm namespace. It's annoyingly vague.
by triyambakam 3y ago
I actually wish that no one took the llm namespace. It's annoyingly vague.
- simonw 3y agoI think it's a pretty great name for my tool, given that it lets you interact with dozens of different LLMs via plugins. Plus I like that it's three letters, since it's designed for CLI usage.
- triyambakam 3y agoBut your tool isn't an llm. llmt for e.g. llm tool could be better
- thih9 3y agoYes - at the same time it would similarly fit other tools where some form of working with LLMs is the main feature. And with time we might get more of these. At least it’s not called “ai”, we have that already, e.g. https://github.com/yufeikang/ai-cli https://github.com/yufeikang/ai-cli
- wokwokwok 3y agoSure, but it’s not like you own the name LLM. I mean, let’s say you picked say, “ghost pony”; ok, sure, it’s obviously a name. But LLM? I mean, it’s not like you can get a lot more generic than that. If your tools name is “tool” and some else makes a tool called “tool”, you can’t really complain that much…
- arcanemachiner 3y agoThis is kinda how I feel about HTTPie taking using 'http' in the CLI.
- coding123 3y agoAlmost every package is vague if you're just going off names of packages. Is 'pandas' some kind of screensaver showcasing the cute animals?
- rollcat 3y agoI like what Go does (I know, the irony). Buy a domain name, that's your namespace.
- rmorey 3y agoIf the name is available, someone will take it, and I can think of no better steward of it than Simon