• Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’ve been on an accounting course and yeah, it actually takes a little brains and then a billion checks that you didn’t typo anything.

        LLM’s aren’t great with the former and are utter dogshit with the latter. The amount of times it goes for something beyond ridiculous isn’t so bad that they’re worthless, but as of now, if you use one for accounting on any significant scale, I’d say there’s non-insignificant chance you’ll be breaking some sort of accounting / taxation rules in a matter of hours. And the governments (in general, all of them) don’t really take kindly to that kind of shit.

      • slazer2au@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        👍

        I am absolutely in favour of not burning power asking a language model to do non language tasks.

        • vermaterc@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I believe the point of this article is not to convince everyone to fire all it’s accounting staff and start relying on LLMs.

          The point is to develop a measure of how well they can handle complex problems.

          • slazer2au@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            If a business person genuinely thinks a language model can replace technical or skilled staff then they A: don’t know how their business works, and B: don’t know what their staff does.

            We have seen time and time again of lawyers being fined for llms making fake cases, ‘vibe coding’ business collapse because the llms give dangerous code.