Your assertion is that LLMs "create apps which are more crafted and have more refinement than 80% of the human made apps"

If, as you assert here, LLMs are functionally equivalent in their "creative" process to humans, and you admit (as you seem to) that LLMs simply "steal ideas" from humans (which is apparently what you believe human creativity is comprised of,) to what do you attribute the apparently superior taste and design skills that LLMs have over humans?

▲

dist-epoch a day ago | parent [-]

LLMs can now solve famous math problems which humans failed to for 100 years.

LLMs can now create animations as beautiful as those of top humans animators.

LLMs can now design apps better than the vast majority of programmers.

I don't know why, and frankly I don't care.

I'm sure you have a theory why LLMs are solving incredibly hard math problems, probably along the lines "they were not actually hard problems, LLMs don't think or discover new things, they just interpolate in the convex hull of training data, so probably you just had to look in the right place and humans didn't had time to do that due to the vast search space".

	▲	krapp a day ago \| parent [-]
		>I'm sure you have a theory why LLMs are solving incredibly hard problems, probably along the lines "they were not actually hard problems, you just had to look in the right place and humans didn't have time to do that". Now you're moving the goalposts and arguing with strawmen. You should ask an LLM to try to form a cogent argument. "I don't know, and I don't care, I just know you're wrong" doesn't make for interesting conversation. I'll let you have the last word, you seem the type who insists upon it. Good day.