[selcuka]

Yeah, that's the point, right? With tool calling the LLM becomes code. So instead of asking it to write an accounting software, you can hire the LLM to be your accountant.

[recursive]

But you'd still need code if you need something done in a consistent way.

[block_dagger]

Not necessarily. Consider a human assistant who performs repetitive tasks at an acceptable cost and accuracy while dealing with edge cases often autonomously.

[rafaelmn]

If we want reliability - we come up with processes to make it reliable and not rely on individuals getting it right. Code is a way to create a reliable process in the digital world.

[saxenaabhi]

Maybe acceptable in some cases but the original example in this thread was about accounting and they use software to do the counting not humans.

And even id humans/llms do it there would still be a need for systems of record with things like audit log etc.

[recursive]

For some things that's acceptable or even good. If I want to add up a list of a million numbers human assistants aren't bringing any advantages though.

[flextheruler]

I'd like to apply for this job where I can make mistakes and it's considered an acceptable cost. Seriously, I can't remember the last time I made a significant error and it was acceptable. Maybe during training? Half the effort in any job is literally verifying correctness.