zlacker

>>gregor+(OP)
"I thoughts LLMs were glorified Markov chain generators"

"the code actually looked pretty good. Not perfect, but I just told the AI to fix things, and it did. I was shocked."

These two views are by no means mutually exclusive. I find LLMs extremely useful and still believe they are glorified Markov generators.

The take away should be that that is all you need and humans likely are nothing more than that.

>>weinzi+tD
> I find LLMs extremely useful and still believe they are glorified Markov generators.

Then you should be able to make a markov chain generator without deep neural nets, and it should be on the same level of performance as current LLMs.

But we both know you can't.

>>buffer+DR
You can, but it will require far more memory than any computer has.