logoalt Hacker News

nemo1618today at 12:37 AM1 replyview on HN

I am quite tired of this take, frankly. The implication is that if we continue iterating on prompt optimization, we're going to reinvent what, JavaScript? BASIC? Lisp?

English is not a programming language. Yet English is sufficient to communicate requirements to the degree that we actually care about. A programmer's job is to translate English into lower-level machine language. Necessary to this process is "filling in the gaps" -- that is, extrapolating the expressed intent to cover all the little details that were left unspecified. This system works because humans are at least minimally competent at predicting the preferences of other humans. If your prediction turns out to be wrong, you get feedback and iterate.

Well, guess what. LLMs are also competent at predicting the preferences of humans. LLMs can "fill in the gaps" like no one's business. LLMs can iterate on requirements like no one's business.

Product managers do not speak to programmers in a language that encodes exact requirements, and yet working software somehow gets shipped anyway. LLMs do not need exact requirements either.


Replies

antonymoosetoday at 12:42 AM

Maybe I’m behind the curve here because I work in an SRE/DevOps context as of late - but LLMs routinely shit the bed and fail to solve basic issue for me when I try to use them (Thanks, Management)

I don’t need a model to shit out a REST endpoint. I need it to figure out esoteric errors that take hours or days of debugging. They just don’t do well here. Of course, if a diligent engineer refined considerations from a PM and Engineering Manager I wouldn’t have the job I have.