[mr_tristan]

I don’t use an LLM largely because my current codebase has a massive amount of bespoke internal APIs. So LLMs are just useless and wrong for almost any task I use.

But this has led me to wonder if there will be gradual pressure to build on top of LLMs, which, in turn, will really only be useful with the tried and true. Like, we’re going to be heading towards an era where innovation means “we can ask the LLM about it”. Given the high capital costs required to train, I wouldn’t be shocked to see LLMs ignoring new unique approaches and biasing to whatever the big corps want you to do. For “accuracy”.

I just sense were about to hit an era of software causing massive problems and costs, because LLMs are rapidly accelerating the pace of accidental complexity, and nobody knows really how to make money off them yet.

[layer8]

Exactly my thoughts. It might even work reasonably well in the end, but it seems it would make the world of computing a much less fun place.