[VeninVidiaVicii]

I find your observation about the two camps in computer science quite compelling, and it got me thinking about another analogy that might further illuminate the LLM debate: the evolution of cities.

Urban development can be seen as a balance between careful planning (akin to the mathematics camp) and organic growth (resembling the engineering camp). A city designed with a focus on aesthetics and theoretical frameworks might be visually appealing, but it could lack adaptability. On the other hand, a city that grows organically may not be as cohesive, but it's more practical and responsive to its inhabitants' needs.

This parallel can help us better understand the emergent properties of LLMs, which arise from their complex interactions. By appreciating both the engineering and mathematics perspectives, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of these properties.

Moreover, the balance between early adoption and risks, as seen in urban development, can also apply to LLMs. Early adopters of LLMs can tap into their potential, but they must also be aware of potential risks, such as biases and ethical concerns.

Oh yeah ChatGPT wrote this answer.

[it_was_cool]

Good reminder of how vacuous even thoughtful-sounding writing can be.