6 ms·
Ah, yes! The universal and uncheatable LLM! Surely nothing can go wrong.
by jonkoops 1y ago
Ah, yes! The universal and uncheatable LLM! Surely nothing can go wrong.
- progx 1y agoAs i wrote "not perfect". But better than anything else or nothing.
- robertlagrant 1y agoThe Politician's Syllogism[0] is instructive. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician's_syllogism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician's_syllogism
- progx 1y agoOK, we are here now on reddit or facebook? I thought we discuss here problems and possible solutions. My fault.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- robertlagrant 1y agoI don't think "we should use AI to solve this" is a solution proposal.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- rpdillon 1y agoI'm not sure why everyone is so hostile. Your idea has merit, along the lines of a heuristic that you trigger a human review as a follow-up. I'd be surprised if this isn't exactly the direction things go, although I don't think the tools will be given for free, but rather made part of the platform itself, or perhaps as an add-on service.
- progx 1y agoI can't wait to read about your solution.
- orphea 1y agoYou don't need to be a chef to tell that the soup is too salty.
- NitpickLawyer 1y agoPerfect is the enemy of good. Current LLM systems + "traditional tools" for scanning can get you pretty far into detecting the low hanging fruit. Hell, I bet even a semantic search with small embedding models could give you a good insight into "what's in the release notes matches what's in the code". Simply flag it for being delayed a few hours, till a human can view it. Or run additional checks.