> When you use an LLM, [...] you get to pay the social tax: you converse and negotiate and convince and sometimes even get angry1 at the so-called tool.
Might be a subjective opinion, but this is how writing code always felt to me, even pre-LLMs. An ongoing inner conversation where I try to convince the text on the screen to match the text in my head. It never really felt like tool use in the sense of manual labor.
It was a tongue-in-cheek comment, not really a perfect analogy to the situation. Still, the author expects teams with different priorities and design philosophies to follow a new standard, that can easily end up in more fragmentation.
More diversity in the LLM space is always good. In my experience though, speaking as a native speaker of one of the less-used European languages, Mistral's models already use it pretty well.
>(the water is thoroughly irradiated from a war that happened 200 years ago)
This is what I always found grating about the writing in Bethesda Fallout games. Their writers think that the war happened last Tuesday and there are parts of the old world behind every other door. In universe, the war happened more than two centuries ago and humanity has moved on, in several strange ways.
For some reason it was very hard for the Victorians who pioneered archaeology to understand that ancient humans were actual human beings and not storytelling archetypes or moral exemplars. This kind of archaeology is just inverted science fiction: Commenting on the present through the lens of the imaginary past, instead of the imaginary future.
Even if you absolutely have to use an LLM for some reason, there are already perfectly good LLMs for code generation that you can comfortably run on commodity hardware.
Might be a subjective opinion, but this is how writing code always felt to me, even pre-LLMs. An ongoing inner conversation where I try to convince the text on the screen to match the text in my head. It never really felt like tool use in the sense of manual labor.