[simianwords]

Eh this is also not true. Non determinism doesn’t disqualify something from being useful and necessary. If you are a manager, you employ people (who are non deterministic) to get stuff done.

In fact entirety of humanity has been delegating work to non deterministic specialists. Like how I delegate making food to non deterministic supply chains and capitalism. No one complains about skill atrophy here I’m sure.

“But humans can learn..” well sure agents can learn too, adapt the markdown files.

“But humans are accountable..” distinction without a difference

[discreteevent]

My argument was not that LLMs aren't useful but that a compiler is a completely misleading anamlogy.

You compared them to humans. Humans live in the world, have a world model, meet people for lunch and exchange ideas. Agents read markdown files and code.

Simanwords, you spend a lot of time on HN promoting LLMs and being dismissive of humans in comparison. I have to ask:

Whose side are you on?

[simianwords]

> You compared them to humans. Humans live in the world, have a world model, meet people for lunch and exchange ideas. Agents read markdown files and code.

You don't like that LLM's can be compared to compilers because compilers are deterministic. You don't like LLM's being compared to humans because.. LLMs can't meet people for lunch? I don't think determinism was something you were worried about in the first place.

Unfortunately, I think a useful + non deterministic tool is not something people can grasp for some reason