I think you shouldn't call it "prompt engineering" until you do some real "engineering". For example, if you use Guidance from microsoft, where you write a prom

I think you shouldn't call it "prompt engineering" until you do some real "engineering". For example, if you use Guidance from microsoft, where you write a prompt "template" and let guidance filter the logits probabilities at the corresponding points for you, I claim that this is "engineering (the way we use it as SWEs anyway) because it's analogous to writing an actual program. I was actually upset about everyone claiming they're a "prompt engineer" without any real engineering that I wrote a snarky github gist about it that was on the front page for a big. It's mainly pointing out that NLP can't even do real prompt engineering like Stable Diffusion folks can because we didn't build the right tooling for it yet. https://gist.github.com/Hellisotherpeople/45c619ee22aac6865ca4bb328eb58faf https://gist.github.com/Hellisotherpeople/45c619ee22aac6865c...