> The LLMS are very good at logic, by the way.
It's wild to read this stuff and then also deal with the constant headaches of day to day hallucinations when interacting with Claude et al.
It's wild to read this stuff and then also deal with the constant headaches of day to day hallucinations when interacting with Claude et al.
What kind of domain are you working in?
It's a bit better than 18 months ago but it's hard to say by how much. It just seems like the culture has moved to building up fixtures that let the LLMs brute force the problems. To my eyes that's the opposite of solving things logically. It has the added effect of hiding how the sausage is made, though.
I mean, how can they possibly say they haven't written a line of code if they're actually going through it? I can only assume they're just looking at the results. So then how can they judge it's good at logic?
If it was so good at not making mistakes, why even have tests? It's nonsensical on its face.