←back to thread

Tools: Code Is All You Need

(lucumr.pocoo.org)
313 points Bogdanp | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.29s | source
Show context
pclowes ◴[] No.44454741[source]
Directionally I think this is right. Most LLM usage at scale tends to be filling the gaps between two hardened interfaces. The reliability comes not from the LLM inference and generation but the interfaces themselves only allowing certain configuration to work with them.

LLM output is often coerced back into something more deterministic such as types, or DB primary keys. The value of the LLM is determined by how well your existing code and tools model the data, logic, and actions of your domain.

In some ways I view LLMs today a bit like 3D printers, both in terms of hype and in terms of utility. They excel at quickly connecting parts similar to rapid prototyping with 3d printing parts. For reliability and scale you want either the LLM or an engineer to replace the printed/inferred connector with something durable and deterministic (metal/code) that is cheap and fast to run at scale.

Additionally, there was a minute during the 3D printer Gardner hype cycle where there were notions that we would all just print substantial amounts of consumer goods when the reality is the high utility use case are much more narrow. There is a corollary here to LLM usage. While LLMs are extremely useful we cannot rely on LLMs to generate or infer our entire operational reality or even engage meaningfully with it without some sort of pre-existing digital modeling as an anchor.

replies(4): >>44455110 #>>44455475 #>>44455505 #>>44456514 #
foobarbecue ◴[] No.44455475[source]
Hype cycle for drones and VR was similar -- at the peak, you have people claiming drones will take over package delivery and everyone will spend their day in VR. Reality is that the applicability is more narrow.
replies(6): >>44455895 #>>44456324 #>>44456606 #>>44457214 #>>44458356 #>>44460090 #
jangxx ◴[] No.44455895[source]
I mean both of these things are actually happening (drone deliveries and people spending a lot of time in VR), just at a much much smaller scale than it was hyped up to be.
replies(3): >>44456311 #>>44456337 #>>44456408 #
giovannibonetti ◴[] No.44456311[source]
Drones and VR require significant upfront hardware investment, which curbs adoption. On the other hand, adopting LLM-as-a-service has none of these costs, so no wonder so many companies are getting involved with it so quickly.
replies(1): >>44456555 #
1. nativeit ◴[] No.44456555[source]
Right, but abstract costs are still costs to someone, so how far does that go before mass adoption turns into a mass liability for whomever is ultimately on the hook? It seems like there is this extremely risky wager that everyone is playing--that LLM's will find their "killer app" before the real costs of maintaining them becomes too much to bear. I don't think these kinds of bets often pay off. The opposite actually, I think every truly revolutionary technological advance in the contemporary timeframe has arisen out of its very obvious killer app(s), they were in a sense inevitable. Speculative tech--the blockchain being one of the more salient and frequently tapped examples--tends to work in pretty clear bubbles, in my estimation. I've not yet been convinced this one is any different, aside from the absurd scale at which it has been cynically sold as the biggest thing since Gutenberg, but while that makes it somewhat distinct, it's still a rather poor argument against it being a bubble.