by henrik_w on 3/10/24, 4:28 PM with 15 comments
by raziel2p on 3/10/24, 5:02 PM
Just like with prompts, these are never really followed exactly either (in the way that we never read the full TOS), and are mostly there as guidance, as well as justification for punishment/recourse (or at least exemption of responsibility) if not followed.
The tweet about prompts accumulating technical debt also mirrors similar thoughts I have about law - it's very easy to add another law covering special cases, but how all these special cases interact with each other is often unpredictable (the simplest example I think is unintentional tax loopholes).
I'm not sure I have a point here, but this parallel must say something about human cultural and societal structures and how writing/text shapes them. What a fascinating trend to observe.
by optimalsolver on 3/10/24, 5:02 PM
It's got to be exhausting having to write about why each new mind-blowing advance in deep learning isn't actually impressive. The best recent example was Sora. His financial backers would've absolutely creamed themselves if his line of work had produced that, but he was nitpicking this insane development with a magnifying glass.
by singularity2001 on 3/10/24, 5:27 PM
So yes one still needs mathematical programming languages but interacting with them through natural language is a huge leap forward plus (optimistic prediction ) it will also result in a more precise usage or version of English.
by doubloon on 3/10/24, 5:07 PM
So the old tradition of analyzing what sentences and words mean so that you can more clearly state your ideas, itself has been attacked as "useless liberal arts" and replaced by coding camps. So now we have a bunch of people who know how to "code" in a javascript framework that will become obsolete in 18 months but if you ask them to write a short English essay they will look at you with a blank stare.
by beardyw on 3/10/24, 5:22 PM
by yoyohello13 on 3/10/24, 5:05 PM
I think there will be a wave of “code as English” tools, then people will come full circle and develop programming short had for interfacing with LLMs when the limitations start to present themselves.
by danielovichdk on 3/10/24, 6:37 PM
Look into the computer history . Hint: Charles Petzold wrote a book about it, called Code.
by laomai on 3/10/24, 6:11 PM
by baryphonic on 3/10/24, 5:01 PM
GPT-4 makes enough errors when I use it to generate code that my chats with it become excessively long where I am effectively feeding it error messages until it makes something that will at least parse or compile. Having to maintain those over time seems like it would be a nightmare, much worse than the often mediocre tooling programmers are used to.
I'm not anti-LLM, but the hype around them has been unbelievable, and I suspect that's part of the reason for these immense layoffs over the past 18 months. LLMs make me more productive, but I would honestly be terrified to depend on a product that relied on LLMs in its critical path.
by ponector on 3/10/24, 4:56 PM
by d_tr on 3/10/24, 5:12 PM
In any case, only formal languages for me, please.