LLMs are generative and do not have a fixed output in the way past autocompletes have. I know when I accept "intellisense" or whatever editor tools are provided to me, it's using a known-set of completions that are valid. LLMs often hallucinate and you have to double-check everything they output.
I don't know what autocomplete you're using but mine often suggests outright invalid words given the context. I work around this by simply not accepting them
Who'd want an autocomplete that randomly invents words and spellings while presenting them as real? It's annoying enough when autocomplete screws up every other ducking message I send by choosing actual words inappropriately. I don't need one that produces convincing looking word salad by shoving in lies too.
Autocomplete annoys me, derails my train of thought, and slows me down. I'm happy that nobody forces me to use it. Likewise, I would greatly resent being forced to use LLMs.
Completely different context though - you have to feed through your own data for autocomplete and even then it’s based on your own voice as a writer. When you no longer have to write - nor think about those things you’re writing - then your voice and millions of others will be drowned out by LLM trash.
b40d-48b2-979e|2 months ago
yunwal|2 months ago
marcofloriano|2 months ago
LLMs defines paths, ideas, choose routes, analyze and so on. They don't just autocomplete. They create the entire poem.
daliusd|2 months ago
autoexec|2 months ago
daliusd|2 months ago
NegativeLatency|2 months ago
Hard to define but feels similar to the "I know it when I see it" or "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck" definitions.
JohnFen|2 months ago
witte|2 months ago