[citation needed]
> Code generated by LLM is not that different than pulling in a random npm package or rust crate
It's not random, there's an algorithm for picking "good" packages and it's much simpler than reviewing every single line of LLM code.
Everybody agrees that e.g. `make` and autotools is a pile of garbage. It doesn't matter, it works and people use it.
> It's not random, there's an algorithm for picking "good" packages and it's much simpler than reviewing every single line of LLM code.
But you don't need to review every single line of LLM code just as you don't need to review every single line of dependency code. If it works, it works.
Why does it matter who wrote it?
If an LLM wrote it, I know that it is a stream of plausible bullshit generated by a statistical model in response to my prompt, whose function may or may not have anything to do with my intent, because the machine which emitted it lacks any capacity to have intentions or to reason through the consequences of its choices. If I run the code through its paces and the basics seem to work, that tells me absolutely nothing about the rest of it. All I can count on is that the code will appear to be plausible, and I have no way of knowing without careful review whether the assumptions baked into it are sane and fit for purpose.