• Jack_Burton@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    27 days ago

    It could just be someone lazy/bad at their job going from below average to average using llms. Shit productivity to standard productivity can be described as “leaps and bounds”.

    • ZDL@lazysoci.al
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      27 days ago

      Again, however, there’s no evidence beyond the anecdotal that this is a thing. The only formal studies I’ve seen have found the opposite: that LLMs reduce productivity.

      I’d like to see formal studies stating otherwise before I take seriously any claim of huge performance gains, 'cause when I see below average people using LLMs for writing, their writing gets worse, not better, because they lack the ability to assess the LLM output for accuracy.

      • Jack_Burton@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        26 days ago

        Oh absolutely, I’d love to see some real studies on this as well. I was just mentioning that I’d suspect a lot of these numbers to be artificially inflated due to things like I mentioned. The people ai pushes productivity up leaps and bounds for (if they even exist) are probably the people who could just be fully replaced by ai. People who’s bar is already set so low that an ai-aided uptick could be seen as a massive improvement. Leaps and bounds is one thing, but leaps and bounds in a meaningful way is a whole other metric haha.