3 ms·
Doesn't this argument also apply all the way down to machine code, though?
by exizt88 4y ago
Doesn't this argument also apply all the way down to machine code, though?
- endisneigh 4y agoI figured someone would reply with this. Yes, and it is already an issue. However the issue isn’t as bad for a variety of reasons, notably better abstractions. I would argue natural language can never be as precise as code without being effectively a new programming language. The effectiveness as desired is specifically due to the imprecision necessary.
- joshka 4y agoYou're right it can never be as precise, but LLMs might allow us to identify and highlight the imprecision easily.
- arghnoname 4y agoI think they are analogous. One advantage in the programming language model though is you can pick your level of abstraction, from wysiwyg wizard time UI dialogs, to declarative languages, to languages like python, to C, to assembly, to FPGA/ASIC work. The microcode on mainstream chips is closed to us, so not much we can do at that level of abstraction. Similarly the APIs these tools use go from web services to libraries to local system services to libraries to direct syscalls to directly interacting with hardware. The number of people working with each layer directly probably drops monotonically as we get closer and closer to the hardware. ChatGPT type interfaces just seem like one big opaque blob. How do we peel the onion? Does anyone even know what those layers are or understand them?