I can see someone in the future watching a program run and asking “wow, is that ai? A PERSON typed those cryptic letters? No way!”
Code is the highest level from which deterministic output can be derived.
It is the unambiguous spec of the application.
I’ve seen talks from people at openAI talking about how you should treat prompts as specs, and that a good spec can generate the code you need, so the important thing to keep is the spec (prompt).
But LLMs are necessarily non-deterministic, it’d be like every time you compiled the code, you got a different app that fulfilled the same purpose. That’s not really useful.
And if you make the spec unambiguous enough that it always generates undistinguishable apps, well then congratulations, your prompt is just as complex as the code is, except you don’t have any kind of static checking and compiling takes orders of magnitude longer. You might as well just be writing code.
Now will coding look very different in the future? Maybe. I hope not, but it’s looking like it will.
But I don’t think we’ll get to a place any time soon where people write prompts and never fuck with code.
kbal@fedia.io 3 weeks ago
"After all, it was one of the first sectors to deploy A.I. programming in the 1980s, with the four ghosts who chase Pac-Man each responding differently to the player's real-time movements."
All the lines look blurry when you're squinting at things from a position of complete ignorance.
WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
In the not too distant future…
NPC: “ChatGPT told me I got ghosts in my blood and I better inject bleach bout it”
AI Corpo: “thankfully, no human programmed it to respond with that, so we are not liable”
Fascist court: “NPC’s family must pay AI Corpo damages for negative publicity”
__siru__@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks ago
I laughed and cried too much about this.
gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
yeah, we should talk about “probabilistic” vs. “deterministic” behavior instead.