3 ms·
I personally don’t agree with “LLMs are just a tool” but I’m honestly impressed by the author’s description of LLM usage and taking the responsibility for the c
by hofiflo 1mo ago
I personally don’t agree with “LLMs are just a tool” but I’m honestly impressed by the author’s description of LLM usage and taking the responsibility for the code. IMHO, without having looked at the code base itself, this sounds like a pretty healthy way to approach LLM usage!
- UltraSane 1mo ago"I personally don’t agree with “LLMs are just a tool”" Then what are they?
- throwuxiytayq 1mo agoTool users.
- bpavuk 1mo agowell played, hats off! :D
- IshKebab 1mo agoThey're a new category of thing. They aren't really "just an" anything. When the wheel was invented cavemen probably said "it's just a stone".
- hofiflo 1mo agoI’ve observed that people saying “LLMs are just a tool” usually compare them to language server implementations, compilers, and more. I disagree with this view because the tools they’re compared to are usually deterministic in the sense of they’re not just a blackbox that sometimes answers one way, sometimes another depending on whether the API provider changes the model weights, the temperature, etc.
- worik 1mo agoI am part of the "LLMs are tools" crowd I use nail guns as the analogous tool. Perhaps I know a few carpenters Pushing back against two things: * Inappropriate albeit understandable anthropomorphising of the technology * Misanthropy. The capitalist wet dream of doing away with labour entirely