Why not LLMs?

from your link :

A recent study ( papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=60976… ) uses the term “cognitive surrender” to describe the way humans tend to offload key critical thinking skills onto LLMs, even when the output is wrong.

Hey ! this is too much for my old tired brain.

This weekend I wanted to set up my raspberry pi with a LLM multiplexer so that my wife, my kids, and I could share a single subscription but still have our own customizable memories and instructions. Needs a web chat interface using codex as the inference provider. Some day when I have the cash to set up a local LLM server, I’ll switch the back end over.

I don’t have time in my life to create it, so either LLM can do it or not. No downside to letting it try. I gave it barely any instructions beyond that. I wanted a Java microservice. A handful of hours and a couple of usage resets later it’s done and tested.

Allegedly there is a Java repository somewhere on my pi, but I haven’t seen a line of code, and that service is running. Now, I haven’t tested it, and I won’t use it until I’ve reviewed the code, but shit I see how seductive this is for folks who don’t know how to code themselves. And how dangerous because I’ll bet when I look at the code I’m going to have alarm bells ringing.

It’s not that my brain is tired or even that I trust LLMs, I just don’t have time and either an LLM can create the thing I want or I do without. If the project fails, nothing of value is lost. But the difference is I’m looking deeper than if the thing does what I want — I need to make sure it’s done in a safe, extendable way.