Re:Human coders are still better than LLMs
by vidarh on Friday May 30, 2025 @06:25AM
(#44134703)
It is getting to the heart of the problem when the claim made is that "no matter how advanced the model" they can't be 'much more than just "really good autocomplete."'.
Given that they are Turing complete when you put a loop around them, that claim is objectively false.
Re:Human coders are still better than LLMs
by jdiff on Friday May 30, 2025 @01:44PM
(#44138421)
I think it'd even be easier to coerce standard autocomplete into demonstrating Turing completeness. And without burning millions of dollars of GPU hours on training it.
Given that they are Turing complete when you put a loop around them, that claim is objectively false.