I don't understand the point you're making.
replyIt can be both the most powerful LLM on the market, and have no adoption in critical infrastructure.
i know someone who works on nuclear power plants that uses codex
replyobviously you need to review it
That's terrifying.
replyIt is. Not per sé because the code might be of poor quality, but because someone sent that source code to a public API under the promise that oh noooo we won't use your code for training. Probably.
replyenterprise agreements with model providers let you opt out of training
replyIf they ever used Fable, it's sitting in Anthropic's servers for a month
reply> it’s just a useful tool for non-critical areas. That’s all it is.
replyOkay. Let's say I agreed with you.
If you look at all technology and break down the total market for Critical Workloads vs non-critical workloads, what do you think that works out too, percentage wise? 12% critical? 18%? What if it was 30%! That would still mean 70% of the world's software could possibly be handled by an LLM. If that happens, the 30% of the Critical Workloads stuff is gonna get very, very competitive.
Not if the government bans them.
reply