The whole article seemed a little tautological to me. You could say: Scientific advances have massively accelerated with the use of the new tool of electricity

The whole article seemed a little tautological to me. You could say: Scientific advances have massively accelerated with the use of the new tool of electricity, but there are serious concerns about the "black-box" nature of electricity, since no one has ever answered the question "what is charge?". Modern semiconductors depend on quantum effects that no one has ever "explained", but they are highly repeatable, and make useful predictions that can be confirmed. My expectation is that every advance cited in the article, and attributed to LLMs, is in fact the output of a team of human scientists using LLMs as a tool to expand their scope and increase productivity. All of these examples are actually human endeavors. The only qualitative difference I see, is that LLMs are a human invention, whereas electricity and quantum effects are natural phenomenon that were discovered, and utilized as a tool, by humans. While LLMs, and subsequent s/w advances, may well lead us into new, even unexpected, realms of science, the need to be able to confirm repeatable results and verify the accuracy of predictions, will always be necessary. As such, I would still call this science, not "after"...