Have you ever tried to get whatever fancy LLM to write some code for you and had it generate code that was at the same time plausible to look at but complete bullshit?
This is what I am talking about. It can reason and plan for what is the likely token based off its training data. It is completely unable to evaluate the logic of the code it was generating. It can not reason on the context (in this case, programming).
The same is true for other domains. Law, Medicine, etc. the stricter the field, the less reliable LLMs are, because it cannot reason about the context of what it is writing.
That said, I like LLMs, and I think it was an interesting productivity tool, only having been hyped beyond any reasonable expectations. I find it more useful for less strict contexts (for example, creative writing).
This is what I am talking about. It can reason and plan for what is the likely token based off its training data. It is completely unable to evaluate the logic of the code it was generating. It can not reason on the context (in this case, programming).
The same is true for other domains. Law, Medicine, etc. the stricter the field, the less reliable LLMs are, because it cannot reason about the context of what it is writing.
That said, I like LLMs, and I think it was an interesting productivity tool, only having been hyped beyond any reasonable expectations. I find it more useful for less strict contexts (for example, creative writing).