> Determinism is about producing the same output given the same input. In this sense, LLMs are fundamentally deterministic.

You cannot formally verifiy prose or the text that LLMs generates when attempting to compare what a compiler does. So even in this sense that is completely false.

No-one can guarrantee that the outputs will be 100% to what the instructions you are giving to the LLM, which is why you do not trust it. As long as it is made up of artificial neurons that predict the next token, it is fundamentally a stochastic model and unpredictable.

One can maliciously craft an input to mess up the network to get the LLM to produce a different output or outright garbage.

Compilers have reproducable builds and formal verification of their functionality. No such thing with LLMs exist. Thus, comparing LLMs to a compiler and suggesting that LLMs are 'fundamentally deterministic' or is even more than a compiler is completely absurd.

You're just using words incorrectly. Deterministic means repeatable. That's it. Predictable, verifiable, etc are tangential to deterministic. Your points are largely correct but you're not using the right words which just obfuscates your meaning.