Yeah, that's the point, right? With tool calling the LLM becomes code. So instead of asking it to write an accounting software, you can hire the LLM to be your accountant.

▲

recursive a day ago | parent [-]

But you'd still need code if you need something done in a consistent way.

▲

block_dagger 20 hours ago | parent [-]

Not necessarily. Consider a human assistant who performs repetitive tasks at an acceptable cost and accuracy while dealing with edge cases often autonomously.

	▲	flextheruler 12 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I'd like to apply for this job where I can make mistakes and it's considered an acceptable cost. Seriously, I can't remember the last time I made a significant error and it was acceptable. Maybe during training? Half the effort in any job is literally verifying correctness.
	▲	rafaelmn 12 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		If we want reliability - we come up with processes to make it reliable and not rely on individuals getting it right. Code is a way to create a reliable process in the digital world.
	▲	recursive 11 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		For some things that's acceptable or even good. If I want to add up a list of a million numbers human assistants aren't bringing any advantages though.
	▲	saxenaabhi 15 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Maybe acceptable in some cases but the original example in this thread was about accounting and they use software to do the counting not humans. And even id humans/llms do it there would still be a need for systems of record with things like audit log etc.