u/Codesmith-James wrote (the comment Michael replied to):
2. Love this question! LLMs are changing so fast - it’s a great illustration of what defines Codesmith’s pedagogy. We focus on teaching concepts + capacities, not technologies. This means that instead of a “cookbook” or set of “hacks” specific to one version of one LLM, we teach
u/michaelnovati replied · ★ FEATURED
I'm familiar with all three of those grads actually yeah, but I'm curious what data is backing this narrative. From hearing Will it seems to hypothesis on the idea that "capacities" are all that matters, but no one is giving me hard experimental evidence this hypothesis stands up - it's all anecdotal and quotes from individual alumni. And all you need is single counter examples to disprove a hypothesis so this is not a valid argument and I want to know more!!!
Like I know these people and I wouldn't say these are reproducible paths that any Codesmith student could choose to follow.
For example, if you had a bunch of alumni at OpenAI, Anthropic, and Perplexity and generalized from them and resulted in each person with a unique path, that would make more sense to me.
But if everyone is a unique case not in these large scale consistent AI roles as hiring managers and building orgs of thousands of people, I don't see where the confidence comes from to tell prospective candidates you are sure this curriculum will help them.
I'm not being critical here of anything, I'm just diving deep into the details of where this confidence is coming from that the Codesmith approach is coming from.