>most of us would delegate our work code to somebody else or something else if we could.

Laughably narrow-minded projection of your own perspective on others.

We all delegate. Did you knit your own clothes or is that too boring for you?

Enjoying to code/knit is fine but we can no longer expect to get paid well to do it.

Each activity we engage in has different use, value, and subjective enjoyment to different people. Some people love knitting! Personally, I do know how to sew small tears, which is more than most people in the US these days.

Just because I utilize the services of others for some things does not mean that it should be expected I want to utilize the service of others for all things.

This is a preposterous generalization and exactly why I said the OP premise is laughable.

Further, you’ve shifted OP’s point from subjective enjoyment of an activity to getting “paid well” - this is an irrelevant tangent to whether “most” people in general would delegate work if they could.

Do you typically find reductio ad absurdum arguments to be persuasive?

I think I’d call these examples “predictable” failures instead of “odd”.

>OpenAI has also announced a social media project

I haven’t heard about this before this post, but if they’re starting a “Social Media but with AI” site in 2025, can’t help but feel like they’re cooked.

This is interesting when you run it up the abstraction ladder.

What if we take this perspective from “knowledge of news topic of the day” and apply it to “knowledge of the virtue of commenting on a topic”. Are you qualified to actually speak on that subject? Am I? Maybe best not to say anything, since I’m not sure.

The current link includes a link to this page which is a blog post announcement from today.

https://ai.meta.com/blog/llama-4-multimodal-intelligence/

The AI is optimized for producing text that sounds like it makes sense and is helpful.

This is not a guarantee that the text it produces is a correct explanation of the thing you are asking about. It’s a mental trick like a psychic reading tea leaves.

I'm so tired of this caveat.

It's generally pretty obvious if the explanation makes sense. And you can locate the original paper(s) as well to verify.

And you know what? My PhD friends get things wrong all the time too. I need to verify what they say as well.

"This is not a guarantee"? You're right. Nothing is a guarantee, but a lot of things are awfully helpful.

I’m tired of “Well people get things wrong, too.” as a defense of these systems. They should stand or fall on their own merit.

And yes, reducing everything in the world - nothing matters. Everything is relative. What even is truth, amirite?

If that’s our slogan for the future then it is hella depressing.

> They should stand or fall on their own merit.

And they do. They stand on the fact that they save time, raise productivity, and assist in learning. That's the merit.

Demanding absolute perfection as the only measure of merit is bonkers. And if that's the standard you hold everything in your life too, you must be pretty disappointed with the world...

None of my comments say I’m demanding perfection. That’s a fallacy to reduce my position to absurdism, so it can be easily dismissed.

LLMs have not improved my productivity. When I have tried to use them, they have been a net negative. There are many other people who report a similar experience.

You said:

> This is not a guarantee that the text it produces is a correct explanation

A guarantee of correctness is perfection. I don't know else to take it.

Not all jobs or tasks are helped by LLM's. That's fine. But many are, and hugely.

You dismissed it for everyone as "a mental trick like a psychic reading tea leaves". Implying it has no value for anyone.

Your words.

That's just wrong.

Now you say it doesn't have value for you and for some other people. That's fine. But that's not what you were saying above. That's not what I was responding to.

It’s like the people who say these things live on a different planet.

Or an alternate timeline where a different version of LLMs were invented.

It literally knows nothing.

It is incapable of knowledge.

I’m bored of it.

Maybe the tool knows nothing. But it allows me to learn niche things often much faster than via a web browser. So it has to value for me.

I think there’s lot of dangers and problems with it and frankly I’d probably be happier if it was never invented. But even then I can still see the value it has

Neither does Wikipedia. But it’s still awesome.

No one says, “Wikipedia knows everything.”

Gonna submit that business model to a YC 2026 batch.