I misunderstood _because_ it fits my narrative? Or I didn't opened it _because_ it fits my narrative?
I think I nailed it, and the article approach is representative of the "oh shit, it can't do it all" phase, which soon will be followed by "more traditional programming".
These guys promised you an LLM that can do magic, from curing cancer to solve democracy, while delivering half-assed shit that doesn't stand scrutiny (even for the non-hype purposes it was designed for), and somehow I am the "fringe skeptic". If skeptics are on the fringe, then who is in charge of mainstream?
I misunderstood _because_ it fits my narrative? Or I didn't opened it _because_ it fits my narrative?
I think I nailed it, and the article approach is representative of the "oh shit, it can't do it all" phase, which soon will be followed by "more traditional programming".
These guys promised you an LLM that can do magic, from curing cancer to solve democracy, while delivering half-assed shit that doesn't stand scrutiny (even for the non-hype purposes it was designed for), and somehow I am the "fringe skeptic". If skeptics are on the fringe, then who is in charge of mainstream?