undefined | Better HN

0 pointsempath751y ago0 comments

AIs actually are very good at this. They wouldn't be able to write code at all otherwise. If you're careful in your prompting, they'll make fewer assumptions and ask clarifying questions before going ahead and writing code.

0 comments

9rx1y ago

> If you're careful in your prompting

In other words, if you replace natural language with a programming language then the computer will do a good job of interpreting your intent. But that's always been true, so...

benatkin1y ago

Being careful in your prompting doesn’t imply that. That can also be thought of as just using natural language well.

9rx1y ago

What separates natural language from programming language is that natural language doesn't have to be careful. Once you have to be careful, you are programming.

2 more replies

LordDragonfang1y ago

> they'll make fewer assumptions and ask clarifying questions before going ahead and writing code.

Which model are you talking about here? Because with ChatGPT, I struggle with getting it to ask any clarifying questions before just dumping code filled with placeholders I don't want, even when I explicitly prompt it to ask for clarification.

oxfordmale1y ago

AI is very good at this. Unfortunately, humans tend to be super bad at providing detailed verbal instructions.

nomel1y ago

Then those same humans won't be able to reason about code, or the problem spaces they're working in, regardless, since it's all fundamentally about precise specifics.

indymike1y ago

Languages used for day to day communication between humans do not have the specificity needed for detailed instructions... even to other humans. We out of band context (body language, social norms, tradition, knowledge of a person) quite a bit more than you would think.

nomel1y ago

Programming languages, which are human language, are purpose built for this. Anyone working in the domain of precise specifications uses them, or something very similar (for example, engineering, writing contracts, etc), often daily. ;)

They all usually build down to a subset of english, because near caveman speak is enough to define things with precision.

croes1y ago

AI is a little bit like Occam‘s razor, when you say hoofbeats, you get horses. Bad if you need Zebras.

foobiekr1y ago

I don’t think I’ve ever seen an llm in any context ask for clarification. Is that a real thing?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

9rx1y ago

> If you're careful in your prompting

In other words, if you replace natural language with a programming language then the computer will do a good job of interpreting your intent. But that's always been true, so...

benatkin1y ago

Being careful in your prompting doesn’t imply that. That can also be thought of as just using natural language well.

9rx1y ago

What separates natural language from programming language is that natural language doesn't have to be careful. Once you have to be careful, you are programming.

2 more replies

LordDragonfang1y ago

> they'll make fewer assumptions and ask clarifying questions before going ahead and writing code.

oxfordmale1y ago

AI is very good at this. Unfortunately, humans tend to be super bad at providing detailed verbal instructions.

nomel1y ago

Then those same humans won't be able to reason about code, or the problem spaces they're working in, regardless, since it's all fundamentally about precise specifics.

indymike1y ago

nomel1y ago

They all usually build down to a subset of english, because near caveman speak is enough to define things with precision.

croes1y ago

AI is a little bit like Occam‘s razor, when you say hoofbeats, you get horses. Bad if you need Zebras.

foobiekr1y ago

I don’t think I’ve ever seen an llm in any context ask for clarification. Is that a real thing?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse