> it doesn't reason about ideas, diagrams, or requirements specifications. (...) How often have you witnessed an LLM reduce the complexity of a piece of code?
> Only humans can decrease or resist complexity.
It's funny how often there's a genuine concept behind posts like these, but then lots of specific claims are plainly false. This is trivial to do: ask for simpler code. I'm using that quite often to get a second opinion and get great results. If you don't query the model, you don't get any answer - neither complex or simple. If you query with default options, it's still a choice, not something inherent to the idea of LLM.
I'm also having a great time converting code into ideas and diagrams and vice versa. Why make the strong claims that people contradict in practice every day now?
> Only humans can decrease or resist complexity.
It's funny how often there's a genuine concept behind posts like these, but then lots of specific claims are plainly false. This is trivial to do: ask for simpler code. I'm using that quite often to get a second opinion and get great results. If you don't query the model, you don't get any answer - neither complex or simple. If you query with default options, it's still a choice, not something inherent to the idea of LLM.
I'm also having a great time converting code into ideas and diagrams and vice versa. Why make the strong claims that people contradict in practice every day now?