The premise was that this language is significantly different from other languages in terms of being understood and replicated by an LLM.

The result showed that an LLM does exactly as well with it as you would expect.

The Uncle Fucker song from South Park: Bigger, Longer, Uncut prolly

This. I know some people who have switched to vapes and have steadily reduced their nicotine to 0.

Gotcha. Sorry for being snarky.

Found Satan ☝️

How the hell is 8GB a small amount for a side utility? Are you using LLMs to count to 50?

I’ve once worked on a project where your commits to your dev branch were supposed to be helpful to colleagues for reviews, but they had to be squashed for the feature branch, with comments adhering to the conventional commit “standard”. On the other side of it, there was a horrible pedant of a middle manager, who was rejecting merges based on (debatable) “misformats”.

This affected billing. They supposedly had some scripts evaluating merge requests, and they’d shrug and say “the script rejected it”. This was before LLMs. Come to think of it, they’re probably replaced by an LLM now, prompted by the customer to “try to defraud and fuck with the workforce on every commit”.

So to sum up, maybe OP’s in some sort of corporate hell, or maybe they want a bit more than going git commit -m every time.

As well-intentioned as this might be, I doubt they understand how trained models work.

Come on, you have to admit that “proper use” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. The GIGO problem is not just a result of "mis"use, but a pervasive and steadily worsening problem.

Yea, didn’t you hear calling it otherwise makes you tHe EneMy?

I believe it does, without taking away from the core message.

I think you are critically (I’m not saying intentionally) missing the middle ground in your assessment. Large generative models are great for repetitive, homogenous tasks like surveillance, speech recognition, assembly line quality control, etc.

If I try to look at it from your point of view, regarding creative tasks like developing new software, you have one side claiming that you can make hammers out of chocolate and throw away all your proper ones, and another that’s portrayed as being unreasonable for opposing that.