you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 52 points 2 months ago* (5 children)

I've seldom been described as a normal person, but in my job, I have to get things right or there are problems for real people. So whatever tools I use have to be reproducible in their results, transparent in how they give their answers, and verifiable. So that precludes LLMs, which are automated bullshit firehoses with opaque, constantly mutable workings.

Those are exactly the properties that should never apply to a system whose output actually matters.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I just had a thought. The people pushing for AI use get fined when the make huge mistakes, basically a speeding ticket. But they're pushing AI on people that get fired or go to jail if they make a huge mistake, more like A DUI. So they're saying "use this thing that makes the kind of mistakes that I'd fire you over, and take responsibility of it".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    I use the AI agents to write software which is reproducible in its results, transparent in how it operates and verifiable...

    Trust an LLM to switch on a light? No. Trust an LLM to write a diagnostic script and tell me what problems it notices in 3MB of log files, then write another script to patch the problem? Only if I actually understand the problem it finds and how the solution it creates is going to work.

    They reduce some tasks that used to take weeks to a single day activity, they are NOT universally applicable.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 2 months ago

    No reason you can't use LLMs to write deterministic scripts. Handing off every task to an agent is a crapshoot, but they do help with some tasks. At the minimum - writing regression tests.

  • source
  • parent