Don't credit the LLM
The author argues against the trend of professionals explicitly crediting LLMs for their work, suggesting it dilutes personal accountability. The piece posits that tools should be used without fanfare, and that creators must take full responsibility for the quality of their output regardless of the assistance used.
Why it matters
It addresses the evolving professional ethics and norms surrounding the integration of generative AI in the workplace.
Lately, an odd habit seems to have caught on among my peers when they’ve done something with an LLM .
When asked “how many support requests have we received about the new Feature X?” , they answer “according to [LLM tool], we’ve received 17 requests since it was released.” When posting a pitch document or a pull request, they volunteer “I asked [LLM tool] to write this for me” or “[LLM tool] wrote the unit tests” .
Odd. Like a writer disclosing the spellchecker they used alongside every piece, or a pilot announcing their version of avionics software over the PA while taxiing to the runway.
At first, I put it down to a bit of novelty and excitement. But as this wore on, I started to wonder why someone might feel the need to declare their use of an LLM.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in