|
|
|
|
|
by theaniketgiri
242 days ago
|
|
Fair points and I get where you’re coming from.
I’ve been very open that AI helped with repetitive parts (docs, boilerplate, commit messages). The functional code training logic, model architecture, CLI was written and tested by me.
Some design choices (like storing scripts as strings or using if-else) were just pragmatic decisions made while iterating fast, not signs of AI authorship.
Either way, the project is open source — you can inspect, critique, or even improve any part of it. I’m happy to take constructive feedback. My goal’s just to make LLM training more accessible. |
|
The only time it would be faster to iterate with your scripts hard-coded into your TS files would be if an LLM is doing your iterating for you.
Why would anyone invest time and effort in a project where the author lies through their teeth about provenance? Why use your project that contributes, as it appears, nothing a LLM can't just give me? Why use this when I could just use an LLM to get the same directly in python without dicking around with npm?