[sscaryterry]

I can argue that by applying multiple stochastic processes, with a human in the loop, that you will (may) converge on something that is deterministic. You use tests/test vectors to prove this.

We're no different to AI. The code we write to solve a particular problem can (and probably does) change from day to day, depending on your "mood", what you had for breakfast, if you've been fighting with your significant other, other problems/human emotions.

[cyanydeez]

the humans only there to take the blame. you arn't not goingto be a cyborg, nor is your idea of determinism ever going to last the cycle of the agents, no matter how many memorrry layers, skills and other context guardrails you place.

You're there for blame, not much else. The systems are still going to churn garbage, but because it's a business, that business will rather pay less for garbage they can sell than pay you a living wage, eventuially.

[sscaryterry]

I agree that we as humans are there to be held accountable. I can foresee a future where the "tech" guys will be blamed, whether or not those people are the software developers/engineers/programmers or the tech bros in Silicon Valley.

Converging on a solution via an LLM is possible. The code, well, it wouldn't necessarily be the way a human would write it, better or not...