> Reality is these llms are much better than average in almost all professions now What are you using to measure 'better' here? And what professions come to mi

> Reality is these llms are much better than average in almost all professions now What are you using to measure 'better' here? And what professions come to mind when you wrote 'almost all professions'? If I think about some of the professionals/workers I've interacted with in the last month, yes they _could_ use an LLM for a very small subset of what they actually do, but the error it can introduce if relied upon (the 'average' person is implied to not do their job as well so relying on the output is likely now or into the future?) I would wager makes things worse in their current state. It might get better, especially over such a long time horizon as 20 years, but I'm not expecting them to be recognizable as what we currently have with the SOTA LLMs (which is mostly what people are currently referring to when using the marketing term that is 'AI'). And in the long term focusing/relying on 'AI' to improve the ability of professionals in 'almost all professions' is IMO just the wrong thing to be sinking such a large amount of money into.