Classic shilling behavior of the insufferably embarrassing: redefining words to the benefit of those who pay your bills to the confusion of everyone else.
The definition of engineering, according to people outside the pocket of the llm industry:
> The application of scientific and mathematical principles to practical ends such as the design, manufacture, and operation of efficient and economical structures, machines, processes, and systems.
How do these techniques apply scientific and mathematical principals?
I would argue to do either of those requires reproducibility, and yet somehow you are arguing the less reproducible something is that the more like "physical engineering" it becomes.
Saw a meme on this exact logical fallacy of the 'well-trained dog'.
Panel 1:
Human standing, arms out stretched in a shrug saying, "Why should I study science, biology, mathematics, and physics? It is useless, I will never use it. I will not be a scientist."
Panel 2:
Same human with a rageful expression saying, "5G gives cancer. Vaccines have Mind Control Chips for the new world order. The earth is flat. I saw it on YouTube."
.
Albert Einstein credits the humanities with his successes in physics.
> "Otherwise he with his specialized knowledge—more closely resembles a well-trained dog than a harmoniously developed person. He must learn to understand the motives of human beings, their illusions and their sufferings in order to acquire a proper relationship to individual fellow men and to the community. "
> "This is what I have in mind when I recommend the 'humanities' as important, not just dry specialized knowledge in the fields of history and philosophy."
> "Overemphasis on the competitive system and premature specialization on the ground of immediate usefulness kill the spirit on which all cultural life depends, specialized knowledge included."
> it is not “engineering” - calling software development “engineering” is the craziest thing we’ve been able to squeeze through as an industry.
Even ignoring the 'craziest thing' hyperbole in light of an industry that gave the whole planet depression and anxiety to increase 'engagement' how could you possibly defend this position?
Definition of engineering:
> The application of scientific and mathematical principles to practical ends such as the design, manufacture, and operation of efficient and economical structures, machines, processes, and systems.
The definition of engineering, according to people outside the pocket of the llm industry:
> The application of scientific and mathematical principles to practical ends such as the design, manufacture, and operation of efficient and economical structures, machines, processes, and systems.
How do these techniques apply scientific and mathematical principals?
I would argue to do either of those requires reproducibility, and yet somehow you are arguing the less reproducible something is that the more like "physical engineering" it becomes.