Using LLMs to speed up summarising text is a good use of them, and in the comment you linked to you ignore that he first cites human analysts for the UK context. In that context, using crowd-sourced opinions (which are supposed to be made more accurate by allowing people with inside knowledge to bubble up to the top) to give a very rough approximation of the chance of conflict without the UK seems perfectly reasonable.
Anyway, calling it the “supposed Russian threat” is idiotic, given that they’re already carrying out hostile acts against the UK and much of Europe. Or did you miss the assassinations, sabotage and drone attacks? That’s not the “direct attack” that is assessed as remotely possible - because it’s already here!
Using LLMs to speed up summarising text is a good use of them, and in the comment you linked to you ignore that he first cites human analysts for the UK context. In that context, using crowd-sourced opinions (which are supposed to be made more accurate by allowing people with inside knowledge to bubble up to the top) to give a very rough approximation of the chance of conflict without the UK seems perfectly reasonable.
Anyway, calling it the “supposed Russian threat” is idiotic, given that they’re already carrying out hostile acts against the UK and much of Europe. Or did you miss the assassinations, sabotage and drone attacks? That’s not the “direct attack” that is assessed as remotely possible - because it’s already here!