craigmart

I believe that comparing LLMs with traditional deterministic software is fundamentally misleading. It is extremely difficult to truly interpret what LLMs do internally, and as of now, nobody fully understands it. Even if you trained the LLM yourself, there is no source code you can simply read and learn from.

Sure, having information about how these models were trained is helpful for reproducibility, but it is basically impossible for anyone without substantial capital and access to the same (likely copyrighted) data to reproduce the model. For normal users, owning the model weights essentially means owning 100% of the model, you can inspect and study the weights in much the same way as the lab that produced the model can, you can modify the weights, and you can use and distribute them if the license allows you to

It's up now

I strongly agree with antirez. I believe that an intellectually honest programmer should recognize where their knowledge and experience is mostly beneficial, and at this point (and we've seen clear signs for some time) coding is largely solved. Which doesn't mean that you can just prompt at a very high level, but that iterating with the LLM over decisions, designs and tests, will essentially allow you to not write a single line of code by hand. Software engineering is not just coding, and it involves a whole set of other tasks requiring direction and creativity that can greatly influence the quality and impact of the software.

The most common arguments against this view seem to arise either from ideological resistance, which I understand given how painful it can be to see one’s job at risk or an important part of one’s identity taken away, or from generalizing a small number of experiences with LLMs to the technology as a whole. In the latter case, those experiences may also be heavily conditioned by the user’s inexperience in working with LLMs, or by the specific use case in which they were applied. There are still certain tasks that not all models can handle reliably as of now, however some can (usually the most expensive), and they will likely continue to improve over time.

This is something we have known for a very long time, and companies are not trying to hide that either. They do it to avoid letting competitors train their models on the CoTs

I had checked that page not long ago, and as far as I remember there were many "red" or "orange" days in the past 3 months. Now it's all green. That's concerning

You're right, pardon my cynical remark. I'm just disillusioned by the promises of most tech companies

I had checked as soon as I found out about the news the other day and it was there. I just checked on wayback machine and you're right, it was removed for some time. However, if they're willing to put back that claim immediately, I doubt that their intention was to drop the free plan anytime soon, but probably it was to incentivize people to use the paid plans. Enshittification must happen sooner or later afterall, but fortunately vaultwarden exists and the export feature is highly unlikely gonna be removed immediately as the free plan disappears, so people could just switch to a third-party or self-hosted backend as soon as that happens.

Except for guessing the right continent (not that remarkable), mine is so majestically wrong that I would either dislike or fully hate all of the products I got recommended.