What you said doesn't disagree with what the parent said.

LLM can be trained on a code and at the same time reproduce the core ideas. That's what LLMs do after all - they convert the training data into their own internal models and representations, and then reproduce the ideas.

Sure, some things/patterns, that were repeated multiple times, LLMs will tend to repeat verbatim as well, but that's not that big of a problem.

As a person who invented a few algorithms on my own I absolutely love LLMs and I don't mind them being trained on my work, but yeah - I've been way less likely to publish open source over the last year. In the past, if some of my stuff got traction, the credit was close to automatic (early adopters credited or at least knew where they got it from). Nowadays, LLMs will train on these ideas, rewrite them, and give no credit.

Still, I prefer this to having no LLMs at all.

> but stick to the code samples from the books. > I'm certain it'll be able to change the color of a CSS button, right?

A good enough LLM will just decompile a browser, figure out CSS spec from it, and yes - figure out how to change the color of a CSS button from first principles. There is no point to do this with CSS, but with other things it's now easier to just dig through sorces or direct bytecode than to bother checking docs.

Same argument, just one level down.

Can it decompile a browser using a specification of x86 and the source code of the compiler?

e.g. without training on the source code and binaries of all software it was able to rip from the internet?