[thechao]

LLM's can't gut a fish in the cube when they get to their limits.

On a more serious note: I think the high-level structuring of the architecture, and then the breakdown into tactical solutions — weaving the whole program together — is a fundamental limitation. It's akin to theorem-proving, which is just hard. Maybe it's just a scale issue; I'm bullish on AGI, so that's my preferred opinion.

[alasarmas]

Actually I think this is a good point: fundamentally an AI is forced to “color inside the lines”. It won’t tell you your business plan is stupid and walk away, which is a strong signal that is hard to ignore. So will this lead to people with more money than sense to do even more extravagantly stupid things than we’ve seen in the past, or is it basically just “Accenture-in-a-box”?

[RecycledEle]

AI will absolutely rate your business plan if you ask it to.

Try this prompt:"Please rate this business plan on a scale of 1-100 and provide buttle points on how it can be improved without rewriting any of it: <business plan>"

[alasarmas]

I agree that AI is totally capable of rating a business plan. However, I think that the act of submitting a business plan to be rated requires some degree of humility on the part of the user, and I do doubt that an AI will “push back” when it comes to an obviously bad business plan unless specifically instructed to do so.

[mhh__]

I wouldn't trust an absolute answer but it can help you generate counterarguments that you might miss

[taneq]

> LLM's can't gut a fish in the cube when they get to their limits.

Is this an idiom? Or did one of us just reach the limits of our context? :P

[anu7df]

Office space reference.