3 ms·
I've said it before but no one takes it seriously: LLMs are only useful if you're building something that's already in the training set ie already commodity. In
by almostgotcaught 11mo ago
I've said it before but no one takes it seriously: LLMs are only useful if you're building something that's already in the training set ie already commodity. In which case why are you building it???
- whiterook6 11mo agoIt's not that the product you're building is a commodity. It's that the tools you're using to built it are. Why not build a landing page using HTML and CSS and tailwind? Why not use swift to make an app? Why not write an AWS lambda using JavaScript?
- mythz 11mo ago"LLMs are only useful..." Is likely why no one takes you seriously, as it's a good indication you don't have much experience with them.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- nurettin 11mo agoDo you avoid writing anything that the programming community has ever built? How are you alive???
- antonvs 11mo agoThe obvious point that you're missing is that there are literally infinite ways to assemble software systems from the pieces that an LLM is able to manipulate due to its training. With minor guidance, LLMs can put together an unlimited number of novel combinations. The idea that the entire end product has to be in the training set is trivially false.
- becquerel 11mo agoBecause I'm getting paid to.
- philipp-gayret 11mo agoIt's true, when I was working with LLMs on a novel idea it said sorry I can't help you with that!
- dboreham 11mo agoHistorically big AI skeptic here: what you say is very not true now. LLMs aren't just regurgitating their training data per se. I've used LLMs on languages the LLM has not seen, and it performed well. I've used LLMs on code that is about as far from a React todo app as it's possible to get.
- energy123 11mo agoBell Labs should have fired all their toilet cleaners. Nothing innovative about a toilet.