I enjoy reading Peter’s ‘Python studies’ and was surprised to see here a comparison of different LLMs for solving advent of code problems, but the linked article is pretty cool.

Peter and a friend of his wrote an article over a year ago discussing whether or not LLMs are already AGI, and after re-reading that article my opinion was moved a bit to: LLMs are AGI in broad digital domains. I still need to see embodied AI in robots and physical devices before I think we are 100% of the way there. Still, I apply Gemini and also a lot of open weight models to both 1. coding problems and 2. after I read or watch material on Philosophy I almost always ask Gemini for a summary, references, and a short discussion based on what Gemini knows about me.

I hope Peter Norvig is aware that Advent of Code is trademarked

I'm sorry, but what's the point here ? It's not for a job or improve a LLM or doing something useful per se, just to "enjoy" how version X or Y of an LLM can solve problems.

I don't want to sound grumpy or but it doesn't achieve anything, this is just a showcase of how a "calculator with a small probability of failure can succeed".

Move on, do something useful, don't stop being amazed by AI but please stop throwing it at my face.

    > Move on, do something useful, don't stop being amazed by AI but please stop throwing it at my face.