1. Determinism vs. Non‑Determinism
The debate centers on whether LLMs can ever be treated like compilers that produce the same output for the same input.
- codingdave says, “LLMs are not deterministic, so they are not compilers.”
- CGMthrowaway counters, “Determinism may be required for some compiler use cases, but it isn’t intrinsic to compilation itself.”
- withinReason notes, “LLMs can be sampled deterministically, yet that doesn’t solve the core problem.”
2. Reliability and Hallucinations
Users repeatedly point out that LLMs can produce incorrect or surprising code, making them unreliable building blocks.
- raw_anon_1111 warns, “LLMs hallucinate, so they aren’t reliable building blocks.”
- rvz argues, “LLMs are fundamentally unpredictable… they cannot be trusted to emit correct code.”
- wizzwizz4 adds, “LLM code completion compares unfavourably to traditional pick‑list implementations; the average programmer is less effective when using AI tools.”
3. Practicality, Cost, and Business Impact
Many commenters discuss whether the benefits of LLMs outweigh their drawbacks in real‑world projects.
- SecretDreams proposes, “Let people choose deterministic banking or probabilistic banking—LLMs can run the latter.”
- wavemode imagines, “You finish a project ahead of schedule, cut out expensive engineers, and only lose the company’s reputation.”
- bigstrat2003 cautions, “If you make your computers deliberately make random mistakes, you just make them worse.”
These three themes—determinism, reliability, and practical business trade‑offs—dominate the discussion.