Earlier quoted context omitted.
Previous tools have been deterministic and understandable. I write code with emacs and can at any point look at the source and tell you why it did what it did. But I could produce the same program with vi or vscode or whatever, at the cost of some frustration. But they all ultimately transform keystrokes to a text file in largely the same way, and the compiler I'm targeting changes that to asm and thence to binary in…
> An LLM is always going to be a black box that is neither predictable nor visible (the unpredictability is necessary for how the tool functions; the invisibility is not but seems too late to fix now) So basically, like a co-worker. That's why I keep insisting that anthropomorphising LLMs is to be embraced, not avoided, because it gives much better high-level, first-order intuition as to where they belong in a larger…
Arguably, though I don't particularly need another co-worker. Also co-workers are not tools (except sometimes in the derogatory sense).