I mostly agree with this sentiment, and have a hard time describing anything LLM generated as "mine". However, would you say that the designers at Apple, or Steve Jobs for example didn't "bring the Macintosh to life" because they didn't work on any of the engineering or code? It's a hard line to draw.

Leading a collaborative effort can obviously be described as bringing the project to life. People want to feel like they are collaborating with LLMs and are still the visionary in the process. As the performance of these systems improves that becomes less and less the case.

E.g. if Steve Jobs had simply handed a slip of paper to a team that said "make a new kind of computer", then no, he would not have brought the Macintosh to life.

No, its a very easy line to draw. Rallying and bringing together humans is COMPLETELY different than having an LLM do something. They are not comparable.

No you're just drawing a new arbitrary distinction

In no way shape or form is the distinction between LLMs and Humans arbitrary in any sense.

They are two different things, LLMs are not humans.

So the one orchestrating them would have an even stronger claim to having 'created' something, given its simply a tool?

We’re all middle managers now

"You didn't bring anything to life. You just described how it should be done by the computer using code. The CPU is doing the real work!"

Completely arbitrary distinction. Effort is not more valuable than the results of the effort. This is a mindset that will keep you trapped.

I completely disagree. The mindset that leaves you trapped is focusing on the destination and not the journey. I will never paint like Michaelangelo but it feels good to apply myself to the pursuit of painting, even if the resulting paintings aren't good.