← Back to context

Comment by aurareturn

17 days ago 

  The message is: don't use LLMs to implement any logic.

Too late. I've already asked it to implement logic and that code is in production used by millions of people. Seems to have worked fine.

I disagree with your conclusion and I don't understand why people upvoted this article to the top of HN.

4 comments

aurareturn

Reply
petesergeant  17 days ago

I changed the word to 'execute' in what I wrote to try and make it clearer to you.

  • aurareturn  17 days ago

    That is much clearer.

    The intro to your article is also very confusing.

      Don’t let an LLM make decisions or implement business logic: they suck at that. I build NPCs for an online game, and I get asked a lot “How did you get ChatGPT to do that?” The answer is invariably: “I didn’t, and also you shouldn’t”.

    I assumed that people are asking you how you got ChatGPT to code the NPC for you. Why would people ask you how ChatGPT is powering the NPC? ChatGPT does not have an API. OpenAI has APIs. ChatGPT is just an interface to their models. How can ChatGPT power your NPCs for an online game? Made no sense.

    • petesergeant  17 days ago

      I changed the word "implement" to "execute" on the blog post. Thank you for your feedback. As to:

      > Why would people ask you how ChatGPT is powering the NPC?

      Because they think LLM and ChatGPT are synonymous.

      1 reply →