> terms[!] ... ... I can't imagine a single HN reader who is not aware that LLMs make mistakes. This is not the general public So you wrote 'article' but you m

> terms[!] ... ... I can't imagine a single HN reader who is not aware that LLMs make mistakes. This is not the general public So you wrote 'article' but you meant "submission" ;) > And even most of the general public has heard about this minor issue by now And still some public or private enterprises are trying to push LLMs in dangerous parts of the workflow - possibly because drives like "cutting costs" or "chasing waves" are valued more than objective results... > "AI" was actually about intelligence It was (is) about providing outputs intelligently - relevantly.