|
|
|
|
|
|
by ritz_labringue
376 days ago
|
|
|
I very much agree, and I think people who are in denial about the usefulness of these tools are in for a bad time. I've seen this firsthand multiple times: people who really don't want it to work will (unconsciously or not) sabotage themselves by writing vague prompts or withholding context/tips they'd naturally give a human colleague. Then when the LLM inevitably fails, they get their "gotcha!" moment. |
|
|
I've been playing with language models for seven years now. I've even trained them from scratch. I'm playing with aider and I use the chats.
I give them lots of context and ask specific questions about things I know. They always get things wrong in subtle ways that make me not trust them for things I don't know. Sometimes they can point me to real documentation.
gemma3:4b on my laptop with aider can merge a diff in about twenty minutes of 4070 GPU time. incredible technology. truly groundbreaking.
call me in ten years if they figure out how to scale these things without just adding 10x compute for each 1x improvement.
I mean hell, the big improvements over the last year aren't even to do with learning. Agents are just systems code. RAG is better prompting. System prompts are just added context. call me when GPT 5 drops, and isn't an incremental improvement