5 ms·
On the one hand, I am inclined to agree with you... On the other hand, having spent time with large language models (LLMs) and GPT-3 in particular, there reall
by cl42 4y ago
On the one hand, I am inclined to agree with you...
On the other hand, having spent time with large language models (LLMs) and GPT-3 in particular, there really is an art to writing prompts, structuring them, etc.
I find it hard to defend a business model that has one specific prompt that makes or breaks the company... But there are definitely people who are skilled at writing prompts and I can see companies protecting their prompts (via patents? Trade secrets? Something else?) the way gene sequences are protected, ingredients for popular soft drinks are protected, or the way special molecules are protected.
Anyway, I find it fascinating how deep this line of thinking can go, all from the idea of a "one prompt company" protecting its special sequence of characters that unlocks a specific set of sequences in a LLM matrix! :)
- hackerlight 4y ago> GPT-3 in particular, there really is an art to writing prompts, structuring them, etc. That'll stop being the case in GPT-N. Prompt engineering might be a thing for a short time only.
- smsm42 4y agoThey said it for SEO too, and yet here we are...
- muzani 4y agoI expect it to be like black hat SEO. It could well be a decade. And the result might end up being some heavily neutered output, that's does the job, but is not very interesting.
- sebzim4500 4y agoI imagine that the benefits of well written prompts will decrease over time but they will probably still exist. There is still a knack to getting useful information out of google/bing/etc., even if it is much easier than it was decades ago.
- samatman 4y agoI think this basically misunderstands what the mulchers actually are. The prompt is the only thing there is, it's all they will ever understand. Therefore, engineering prompts is the only way to get behavior out of them. That won't change unless the architecture changes, in which case, it isn't GPT-N.
- NBJack 4y agoGiven we are effectively modeling humans, and there is often plenty of room for misinterpretation in human natural language, we will see. There are good reasons things that 'must not fail' (i.e. civil engineering, accepted medical practice, etc.) are meant to go through rigorous formal review to get it both right and agreed on.
- melagonster 4y agoI trust they spent many years to convert normal language to professional terms, this is a way to reduce influences from natural language.