Citing a few points to justify my own conclusion: > Many (not all) humans screw up on versions of the Tower of Hanoi with 8 discs. > LLMs are no substitute fo

Citing a few points to justify my own conclusion: > Many (not all) humans screw up on versions of the Tower of Hanoi with 8 discs. > LLMs are no substitute for good well-specified conventional algorithms. > will continue have their uses, especially for coding and brainstorming and writing > But anybody who thinks LLMs are a direct route to the sort AGI that could fundamentally transform society for the good is kidding themselves. I agree with the assessment but disagree with the conclusion: Being good at coding, writing, etc is precisely the sort of labor that is both “general intelligence” and will radically change society when clerical jobs are mechanized — and their ability to write (and interface with) classical algorithms to buttress their performance will only improve. This is like when machines came for artisans.