You’ve switched from saying that a cryptocurrency’s “primary purpose” is as a currency for transactions
That was someone else’s argument, but it can’t be denied that the original use-case envisioned blockchain securities as a currency.
Anyway. Are you aware that, assuming the Gartner hype cycle actually does apply here (it’s not universal) and AI is really in the “trough of disillusionment”, beyond that phase lies the “slope of enlightenment” wherein the technology settles into long-term usage? I feel like you’re tossing terminology around in this discussion without knowing a lot about what it actually means.
I’m well aware, it’s the slope down into the trough that will pop the bubble of “AI” overinvestment. I wouldn’t be surprised if some application of LLM tech finds a profitable niche, but I’d be very surprised to see it in common use outside of automated copywriting for scammers.
No, it can’t, because it isn’t and cannot be made trustworthy. If you need a human to review the output for hallucinations then you might as well save yourself the licensing costs and let the human do the work in the first place.
If you think it can’t replace anyone then why say “It can’t replace anyone senior”?
That wasn’t me.
Also, what licensing costs? Some AI providers charge service fees for using them,
Those ones.
but as far as I’m aware none of them claim copyright over the output of LLMs.
Hasn’t it already been ruled that LLM outputs cannot be copyrighted, or was that just patents and I’m misremembering?
And there are open-weight LLMs you can run yourself on your own computer if you want complete independence.
Ah yes, because rolling your own unreliable text generator is so much less expensive. XD