How much more common this term is here than in ordinary English. Higher values mean the topic is more characteristic of this corpus.
1.6x burst in 2025 Q1?
Peak quarter intensity across the topic's active span. Higher values mean attention was concentrated into a shorter stretch rather than spread evenly over time.
Related:?
Topics that appear in the same chunks as this one. Use this to find semantic neighbors, not ranking neighbors.
A short read on the topic's time range, peak episode, and strongest associations. Use it as the quick orientation before drilling into examples.
llms appears in 834 chunks across 141 episodes, from 2023-11-06 to 2026-10-12.
Its densest episode is Bits and Bobs 10/20/25 (2025-10-20), with 17 observations on this topic.
Semantically it travels with Claude, ChatGPT, and Meta, while by chunk count it sits between Claude; its yearly rank moved from #2 in 2023 to #1 in 2026.
Over time
?
Raw mentions over time. Use this to see absolute attention, not relative rank among all topics.
Range2023-11-06 to 2026-10-12Mean5.9 per episodePeak17 on 2025-10-20
Observations
?
The primary evidence view for this topic. Sort it chronologically when you want concrete examples behind the larger pattern.
Showing 834 observations sorted from latest to earliest.
If you just want to know the answer, LLMs will help you stop thinking faster.
If you want to have more questions, they will help you think deeper.
Do you just seek to converge an answer to ea...
...und you.
For example: Blindsight, or The Black Mirror episode Plaything.
If the LLMs had a shared memory, then they could land various individually innocuous things that added up to an outcome that's bad for humanity.
But now they're ...
Auto-generating PRDs is filming vaudeville plays in a world of LLMs.
Instead of "how to automate PRDs," ask "What happens when writing PRDs no longer matters?"
But even if you know that PRDS aren't necessary in the fu...
... are like filming stage plays.
We're still waiting for the "montage" moment for LLMs.
My vote for the montage capability is LLMs being able to create software.
LLMs ability to create software is catastrophically powerful.
We keep on discovering new orders of magnitude more powerful techniques for getting more val...
...: GraphViz.
Graphviz, when rendered, makes sense to humans to understand flows.
LLMs can understand it based just on the markup.
A boundary object for flow graphs between LLMs and humans.
...e a huge unlock with agents.
They used to be hard to understand how to use, but LLMs are great at them.
Giving agents isolation, so if they blow up something, they don't blow up everything else, allows them to move fast.
A powerful pi...
LLMs help diffuse knowledge of a system faster.
To open a restaurant requires navigating a bureaucratic maze.
Talking to people who have done it before, s...
LLMs are great at starting things, not at finishing things.
The human needs to poke them and structure them to do the finishing steps.
"The first 90% is d...
...cially to make it not just usable but also safe) is a huge amount of work, that LLMs don't do a great job at unless you tell them to.
You need to know to tell them to.
Many of the vibe coded apps that succeed in the market get taken d...
Verification is the bottleneck for LLMs.
Verifiers of taste, or of quality, or correctness.[ji]
This is where humans typically still need to be in the loop.
...utually inscrutable.
If they converge, you get a boring, over-saturated middle.
LLMs converge their output.
So now the middle of the distribution of output will be over-saturated.
That will push out the differentiation to the tails.
H...
...n proportion to how many times it runs.
The same is true for workflows that use LLMs.
If it's going to run once, just have an LLM execute an english language prompt.
But if you're going to run it thousands of times, have the LLM write...
...s the situation really does have a faster OODA loop than before.
The ability fo LLMs to write software is truly a fundamental speed limit that has changed.
If it's not you… is it the singularity?