I might also add that, “they,” on the first line are software developers. Most are not trained to read proofs. Few enough can write a good test let alone understand when a test is insufficient evidence of correctness.
I had to learn on my own.
Even if LLMs could start dropping proofs with their PRs would they be useful to people if they couldn’t understand them or what they mean?
Yeah, people fixated on the meaning of "makes no sense" to evade accepting that the proofs LLMs output are not useful at all.
On a similar fashion, almost all LLM created tests have negative value. They are just easier to verify than proofs, but even the bias into creating more tests (taken from the LLM fire hose) is already harmful.
I am almost confident enough to make a similarly wide claim about code. But I'm still collecting more data.
I might also add that, “they,” on the first line are software developers. Most are not trained to read proofs. Few enough can write a good test let alone understand when a test is insufficient evidence of correctness.
I had to learn on my own.
Even if LLMs could start dropping proofs with their PRs would they be useful to people if they couldn’t understand them or what they mean?