troed

It's similar to being an assembler coder when higher level languages with compilers came. No need for management purging, you'll simply be competing for a smaller segment of assigments.

I don't know of a single developer that has actually used LLM aids say there's no benefit to them. Those that refuse do so for some other convictions and don't really know the difference between LLM aiding in tasks and full on yolo vibe coding.

Which I've done, and not a single person has looked them up. The reason for that is that no one here is actually interested in the subject - they just cannot accept their feels about humans being special snowflakes not having any support in the science.

I've sourced two of the foremost specialists on the subject. Blackmore's "Consciousness: An Introduction" amounts to a full university semester on the subject. No, I don't really see it as my job to condense that down in a post here. Anyone who's actually interested can start with reading up summaries that are available freely online instead of posting bad takes at me.

Oh I haven't seen a single person replying so far who has shown any interest in being "better informed".

Yes, as I've described here: https://blog.troed.se/posts/the-delta-between-an-llm-and-consciousness/

I didn't say human brains function like LLMs

Today's LLMs are based on a Google research paper from 2017. Another published paper that would solve this was published by Google in december last year: https://aipapersacademy.com/nested-learning-hope/

Not a single person who has commented is interested in an actual discussion regarding the science on consciousness. It's all this: https://blog.troed.se/posts/the-coming-cognitive-disbelief/

I don't care. See how easy it is? Either you're interested in the subject and you would already know that what I wrote is completely uncontroversial, or you spend time making ignorant posts because a simple fact disagrees with your feels.

The difference between you and me is that I've studied the subject. You have not. It's not on me to teach you the contents of the literature.

Go be annoying somewhere else.

I don't really care much for what you think - I already sourced two well known experts on the subject in another post in this thread.

Yes, the whole field.

I recommend Susan Blackmore's "Consciousness: An Introduction", and of course Douglas Hofstadter's "Gödel, Escher and Bach" and the followup "I am a strange Loop".

I didn't say human brains function like LLMs. I said that everything we know about how human brains work indicates we're also just pattern matching machines in a loop.

The point is that the fact that LLMs are "next token predictors" doesn't in itself say anything about what the emergent effects of that can be.

I've never really cared much if my C-compiler "understands" assembler - just that it produces good results ;)

I used a local LLM yesterday to reverse engineer Winbond's NAND ECC algorithm*. That wouldn't be possible with any other tool since the LLM spent the time "reasoning" around algorithms. I don't really care much about the definition of "reasoning" - just that the job got done.

I feel the AI haters try very hard to claim that the LLMs can't do anything new. That just ... isn't so. LLMs are a new kind of tool and they have plenty of viable uses.

*) https://blog.troed.se/posts/winbond_nand_ecc/