I mean... this has been the most common response to pretty much all LLM criticism since GPT 3? I have yet to see any substantial critique of LLMs that isn't immediately met with "but have you tried the latest models? they're so much better now!"
The article is also clear that it doesn't really matter whether the thing "works" or not - the process of using it is no fun for the author, so why would they want to use it for things that are supposed to be fun?
The article is also clear that it doesn't really matter whether the thing "works" or not - the process of using it is no fun for the author, so why would they want to use it for things that are supposed to be fun?