Every early part of the first llms have exploded and become the target for immense resources/development. This tree of techniques will continue to split and grow, and all ‘slop’/quality complaints and a swath of jobs will disappear quicker than new ones develops.

Commoners should indeed create an independent open and safe computing environment and even basic societal functions. Open communication, storage, development, food, housing where possible and everything else is possible now that this AI tool can work for us too. If we can think it, we can build it.

But I think we should aim higher than “support workers” as the highest goal this time. Let’s go for “no workers needed” and build a society around that principle. We can easily design and maintain a societal environment that optimizes for our common well-being and prosperity, but we need the current archaic and combative win/lose architecture to crash and burn, so another can emerge.

We have a short window to prepare/discover new institutions and processes for an open/safe society without Capitalist parasites in power…

But I’m also scared. Not of the tech itself, but of what happens when capitalists decide to fully automate labor.

Dont worry that’s not gonna happen. A collegue of mine use llms regularly for code reviews, but you have to put in the work to understand whether what they say makes sense and filter out false positives which are not occasional.

While it is a good use case, also require human verification. I use to run my code (C++) trough clang analizers and sometime also with open llm models. The clang is pretty good, the llms also hallucinate on that too.

Code review is a much better use case than writing code for llm s, but still require a grain of salt.

Yeah it seems like llms could be useful for this use case (reviewing code written by a human) vs vibe coding.