• NuanceDemon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Widespread use alone isn’t conclusive proof of productivity, granted. But your alternative seems to require assuming thousands of companies are all independently making the same stupid decision, spending real money on tools that provide no value, while you’ve correctly identified what they’ve all somehow missed.

      Corporate adoption can be wasteful, and some uses absolutely are poor. But that doesn’t establish that LLMs don’t improve productivity. At most, it shows the gains are task-dependent and easy to misuse.

        • NuanceDemon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Then we’ve narrowed the disagreement quite a bit. You accept that LLMs can be used effectively, you’re just asserting that they’re misused far more often than not.

          But both that and “anyone with eyes can see thousands of companies are wasting their money” are still just restating your conclusion baselessly.

            • NuanceDemon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              Arguing against something I didn’t say. I never claimed companies “by default make good decisions.” I said thousands of independent companies and individuals repeatedly choosing to pay for a tool is reasonable evidence that it provides some value to them. That’s not some corporate infallibility, it’s revealed preference.

              Your personal observations are anecdotes. If your claim is that LLMs are far more often harmful than useful, support it?