I don't think it's true, but am I alone in wishing it was? My world is disrupted somewhat but so far I don't think we have a thing that upends our way of life completely yet. If it stayed exactly this good I'd be pretty content.
I agree with your sentiment, but I think we've yet to see the full application of the current technology. (Even if LLMs themselves don't improve, there's significant opportunity for people to use it in ways not currently being done)
That's a big problem with very specific manifestations. My startup helps customers handle regulatory compliance, also by forwarding complex questions to a pool of consultants.
We've compared now more than a hundred replies to that of GPT Pro, and the quality is roughly the same. Sometimes a little worse, sometimes a little better. Always more detailed. Never unacceptable.
But how to convince our customers that we have the right technology and know how to use it appropriately? We're trying, but it's not easy.
Part of that's accountability. In the event of the LLM producing rubbish, as rare as it may be, who is accountable? There is not a person and her reputation attached to it.
LLM plus human should be better than either standalone. You won’t be able to make as much money scaling out, though.
You won’t be able to scale out and make as much money though. But surely you’re not only concerned about profit, right? What’s the point of life if you’re just trying to get rich.
When the dust settles, for example if LLM's were to stop improving today, we would come to learn their exact capabilities, what they can do reliably and what they can't.
Once we know what they can do well and how to get them to do it well, and what they can't, you could say we "trust" them to do the first category well and just stop trying to get it to do the second category.
This feeds the adoption problem, though: a lot of companies are thinking "why settle for the current models when even the vendors are saying the models in six months will be exponentially better? Let's let the early adopters work out the bugs and move when these things are more stable"
I think we're getting to a point where LLM randomness is relevant to someone writing a white paper on LLMs, but not as relevant to consumers of them. Yes the technology uses randomness, but the quality of response somehow still seems very consistent and predictable in 2026.
If you’re not local to the company and they are new to hiring in your area that’s not remote work here to stay, that’s fulfilling a need at a point in time.
Why would the base their HQ in a tax heavy state like California, specifically the Bay Area and build multibillion dollar office buildings? Access to UC Berkeley and Stanford has historically been the answer.
In a few years kids who grew up on zoom looking to go to the office and have the communal experience that escaped them. Grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, and the bank always owns the land on either side of said fence.
All the companies meeting their earnings are back (Msft, Tesla, Apple… curious to see what FB does, but I think Elon is going to want asses in seats so to speak). I can see the articles being written now.
Shoutout to motorcycles! I share a car with my wife, but last year finally got a motorcycle. It's such a joy to have a manual transmission vehicle again, and on a bike you really form a relationship with the power response and physics of the machine.
reply