Is it, though? AI has been around to stay for 20 years. The difference really is that a bunch of tech bros are worshiping it while trade rags talk it up.

The previous iterations of LLMs is not even that close enough to be called AI unlike the current ones we have right now. In many years to come, the AI will improve.

Same, but I still don't find it particularly useful. It does help in the research phase and maybe bootstrapping, but not as much for regular development.

I use it where it makes sense, but it's certainly over-hyped.

I'll agree that it's here to stay, but not so sure it's going to obviously improve. I have had access to various LLMs and while they are useful, they are very obviously limited and have kind of been at that level for a while now. Feel like they've largely gotten as "capable" as the strategy is going to get, and now the game is on to make some things friendlier for LLM consumption to get that capability more usefully available.

At least in the context of coding.

There’s plenty of room for improvement in the theory and application of any type of LLM. I think we’re closer to a plateau than people want to admit. The power and water needs scale wildly upward for slight performance increases. We need to go about this wildly differently for it to be sustainable.

If what we have now can be accurately called AI then what we've had for 20+ years could accurately be called AI.

But neither actually should be called that.