I keep seeing lots of people saying "LLMs are like compilers/assemblers for prompts"

[cwebber@social.coop]

I keep seeing lots of people saying "LLMs are like compilers/assemblers for prompts"

Noooooooooo
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

LLMs are not compilers, and they're not assemblers. Determinism is a key aspect to assemblers and compilers.

And they *certainly* can't be part of a reproducible pipeline

[eramdam@social.erambert.me]

@cwebber If I hear "LLMs are like higher level languages" I will end up on the news, i think

[mntmn@mastodon.social]

@cwebber exactly this. on the flip side, their seemed to be a vast desire among management types and maybe hobbyists for some super easy super high level language. but idk if it's even worth going there. avoiding the details only works until it doesn't

[canacar@ioc.exchange]

@cwebber in the context of rewriting code, though, I think they should be treated like a "translation" tool (like compilers and linkers) and should not be able to change the copyright of the original (other than adding more ambiguity, I suppose).

[krans@mastodon.me.uk]

@cwebber LLM-boosting colleagues keep making this assertion and then retracting it after they see my facial expression

[jaredwhite@indieweb.social]

@cwebber Not only do I hear stuff like this from regular brogrammers, I've even heard it from people I've traditionally admired a great deal for being (to date) serious developers and stewards of platforms & APIs.

I. Don't. Get. It. At. All.

Please make it make sense!! (I know, it doesn't… 😭)