> This is rampant human chauvinism

What in the accelerationist hell?

There's nothing accelerationist about recognising that making unfalsifiable statements about LLMs lacking intelligence or reasoning ability serves zero purpose except stroking the speaker's ego. Such people are never willing to give a clear criteria for what would constitute proof of machine reasoning for them, which shows their belief isn't based on science or reason.

I’ve used these AI tools for multiple hours a day for months. Not seeing the reasoning party honestly. I see the heuristics part.

I guess your work doesn't involve any maths then, because then you'd see they're capable of solving maths problems that require a non-trivial amount of reasoning steps.

Just the other day I needed to code some interlocked indices. It wasn't particularly hard but I didn't want to context switch and think so instead I asked gpt 4o. After a back and worth for 4 or 5 times, where it gave wrong answers I finally decided to just take a pen and paper and do it by hand. I have a hard time believing that these models are reasoning, because if they are they are very poor at it.

GPT-4o isn't classified as a "reasoning" model (by common 2025 terminology at least) - I suggest trying again with o3 or Claude 4 or Gemini 2.5.