We've been living in that world since the invention of the compiler ("automatic programming"). Few people write machine code any more. If you think of LLMs as a new variety of compiler, a lot of their shortcomings are easier to describe.

▲

qwm 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

My compiler runs on my computer and produces the same machine code given the same input. Neither of these are true with AI.

	▲	wiml a day ago \| parent [-]
		You can run an LLM locally (and distributed compile systems, where the compiler runs in the cloud, are a thing, too) so that doesn't really produce a distinction between the two. Likewise, many optimization techniques involve some randomness, whether it's approximating an NP-thorny subproblem, or using PGO guided by statistical sampling. People might disable those in pursuit of reproducible builds, but no one would claim that enabling those features makes GCC or LLVM no longer a compiler. So nondeterminism isn't really the distinguishing factor either.

▲

bdangubic 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

last thing I want is non-deterministic compiler, do not vibe this analogy at all…

▲

moffkalast 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Finally we've invented a compiler that we can yell at when it gives bullshit errors. I really missed that with gcc.