it has nothing to do with disdain of LLMs, i'm an extensive user of warp (a very good LLM-based tool) and at my job we use them in depth in the software i build

it has nothing to do with disdain of LLMs, i'm an extensive user of warp (a very good LLM-based tool) and at my job we use them in depth in the software i build for summarization and other tasks that LLMs are generally considered good at. i spend a lot of time working with LLMs and find that, in some cases, they can be extremely useful, particularly when it comes to completing simple tasks in natural language. i am also aware of their limitations and have a reasonable and realistic view of what they can currently do and where they are headed. i have seen many failure modes, i am familiar with patterns in their output, and i understand the boundaries of their comprehension, capabilities and understanding. not buying into the current silicon valley money pit du jour and misunderstanding studies to validate that view does not equate to just being disdainful. i'm being realistic, because i understand what they do and how they work. i'm not going to circle with you - you don't seem all that interested in engaging with the meat of anything i say to you, and instead just want to continue to try and rationalize your misunderstanding of the single study you found in support of your position, which is your right. i feel ethically obligated to say, once again, that an LLM isn't a doctor and you should under no circumstances go to one for medical advice. you could really cause yourself some problems. if you do so, that's on you. best of luck. incidentally i suspect someone has an awesome picture of a monkey at a steep discount you might be interested in.