alt Hacker NewsYou have a lot of control over what the LLM creates. The way you phrase your requirements, give it guidance over architecture, testing, ux, libraries to use. You can build your own set of skills to outline how you want the LLM to automate your software process. There's a lot of craftmanship in making the LLM do exactly what you think it needs to do. You are not a victim at the mercy of your LLM.
You are a lead architecture, a product manager, a lead UXer, a lead architect. You don't have 100% control over what your LLM devs are doing, but more than you think. Just like normal managers don't micromanage every action of their team.
Replies
> You have a lot of control over what the LLM creates. The way you phrase your requirements, give it guidance over architecture, testing, ux, libraries to use. You can build your own set of skills to outline how you want the LLM to automate your software process
Except for the other 50% of the time where it goes off the rails and does what you explicitly asked it not to do.
> You have a lot of control over what the LLM creates.
No, you don't, you have "influence" or "suggestion".
You can absolutely narrow down the probability ranges of what is produced , but there is no guarantee that it will stick to your guidelines.
So far, at least, it's just not how they work.
> You don't have 100% control over what your LLM devs are doing, but more than you think. Just like normal managers don't micromanage every action of their team.
This overlooks the role of actual reasoning/interpretation that is found when dealing with actual people.
While it might seem like directing an LLM is similar in practice to managing a team of people, the underlying mechanisms are not the same.
If you analyse based on comparisons between those two approaches, without understanding the fundamental differences in what's happening beneath the surface, then any conclusions drawn will be flawed.
---
I'm not against LLM's, i'm against using them poorly and presenting them as something they are not.