I'm sure 10 years from now, assuming LLMs don't prove me wrong, I'll make a similar comment about LLMs and a new hype that I just made about 3d printing, and I'll get EXACTLY this reply. "Oh yeah, well here's a niche application of LLMs that you didn't account for!".

> how positive are you that some benefits in your life are not attributable to 3d-printing used behind the scenes for industrial processes?

See where I said "in consumer products". I'm certainly not claiming that 3d printing is never used and is not useful. However, what I am saying is that it was hyped WAY beyond industrial applications.

In fact, here I am, 11 years ago, saying basically exactly what I'm saying about LLMs that I said about 3d printing. [1]. Along with people basically responding to me the exact same way you just did.

> how sure are you that ML is not used behind the scenes to benefit your life? do you consider features like fraud detection programs, protein-folding prediction programs to create, and spam filters valuable in and of themself?

Did I say it wasn't behind the scenes? ML absolutely has an applicable location, it's not nearly as vast as the hype train would say. I know, I spent a LONG time trying to integrate ML into our company and found it simply wasn't as good as hard and fast programmed rules in almost all situations.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/15iju9/3d_print...

That's the sleight of hand LLM advocates are playing right now.

"Imagine how many people are just putting data into computers! We could replace them all!"

Yet LLMs aren't "just putting data into a computer" They aren't even really user/app interfaces. They are a magic box you can give directives to and get (generally correct, but not always) answers from.

Go ahead, ask your LLM "Create an excel document with the last 30 days of the high temperatures for blank". What happens? Did it create that excel document? Why not?

LLMs don't bridge the user/app gap. They bridge the user/knowledge gap, sometimes sort of.

The most interesting uses of AI tools in a classroom I've seen is teachers showing students AI-generated work and asking students to critique it and fact check it, at which point the students see it for what it is.

No? Solving homework was never meaningful. Being meaningful was never the point of homework. The point was for you to solve it yourself. To Learn with your human brain, such that your human brain could use those teaching to make new meaningful knowledge.

John having 5 apples after Judy stole 3 is not interesting.