←back to thread

1480 points sandslash | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.465s | source
Show context
OJFord ◴[] No.44324130[source]
I'm not sure about the 1.0/2.0/3.0 classification, but it did lead me to think about LLMs as a programming paradigm: we've had imperative & declarative, procedural & functional languages, maybe we'll come to view deterministic vs. probabilistic (LLMs) similarly.

    def __main__:
        You are a calculator. Given an input expression, you compute the result and print it to stdout, exiting 0.
        Should you be unable to do this, you print an explanation to stderr and exit 1.
(and then, perhaps, a bunch of 'DO NOT express amusement when the result is 5318008', etc.)
replies(10): >>44324398 #>>44324762 #>>44325091 #>>44325404 #>>44325767 #>>44327171 #>>44327549 #>>44328699 #>>44328876 #>>44329436 #
aaron695[dead post] ◴[] No.44325404[source]
[flagged]
bgwalter ◴[] No.44326722[source]
> It makes no sense at all, it's cuckooland, are you all on crazy pills?

Frequent LLM usage impairs thinking. The LLM has no connection to reality, and it takes over people's minds.

replies(2): >>44326752 #>>44327102 #
infecto ◴[] No.44327102[source]
Sounds like you’re taking crazy pills.

Far to early from any of the studies done so far to come to your conclusion.

replies(2): >>44327371 #>>44341212 #
bgwalter ◴[] No.44327371[source]
The LLM proponents are so desperate now that they have to resort to personal insults. Are investors beginning to realize the scam?
replies(2): >>44327481 #>>44327809 #
Kiro ◴[] No.44327809[source]
You were the one who started with the insults.
replies(1): >>44327830 #
1. bgwalter ◴[] No.44327830[source]
Saying to someone "you are more intelligent if you don't use an LLM" is a compliment, not an insult.
replies(1): >>44328287 #
2. Kiro ◴[] No.44328287[source]
You're not fooling anyone.