>Because when people use LLMs, they are getting the tool to do the work for them, not using the tool to do the work. What? How on god's green earth could you e

>Because when people use LLMs, they are getting the tool to do the work for them, not using the tool to do the work. What? How on god's green earth could you even pretend to know how all people are using these tools? > LLMs are not calculators, nor are they the internet. Umm, okay? How does that make them less useful? I'm going to give you a concrete example of something I just did and let you try and do whatever mental gymnastics you have to do to tell me it wasn't useful: Medicare requires all new patients receiving home health treatment go through a 100+ question long form. This form changes yearly, and it's my job to implement the form into our existing EMR. Well, part of that is creating a printable version. Guess what I did? I uploaded the entire pdf to Claude and asked it to create a print-friendly template using Cottle as the templating language in C#. It generated the 30 page print preview in a minute. And it took me about 10 more minutes to clean up. > I suspect that as the serious problems with LLMs become ever more apparent, this will become standard policy across the board. Certainly I hope so. The irony is that they're getting better by the day. That's not to say people don't use them for the wrong applications, but the idea that this tech is going to be banned is absurd. > A good rule of thumb is to simply reject any work that has had involvement of an LLM Do you have any idea how ridiculous this sounds to people who actually use the tools? Are you going to be able to hunt down the single React component in which I asked it to convert the MUI styles to tailwind? How could you possibly know? You can't.