> He is showing computers can solve these issues, without using an LLM architecture.

Isn't it a LLM he's building though? My very point is that this particular use case could be solved better without building a LLM, now you claim he is not? The description of what he's doing surely makes it sound like it's a (very small) LLM, and personally I'm still on the "if it quacks like a duck" train in life.

> A lot of people have sort of forgot that machine learning is more than just LLMs these days.

Yeah, which I guess if you make my previous comment more concise, is exactly what I state too.