3 ms·

> pretty good at what it does. Why can’t people just appreciate that? I tried very hard to make it work, and it’s a frustrating experience every single time. I

> pretty good at what it does. Why can’t people just appreciate that? I tried very hard to make it work, and it’s a frustrating experience every single time. I cannot understand how people can consider it to be “good” if they cannot trust its output, unless by “good” they mean “entertaining”. It’s like we’re living in two completely different realities, where some folks appear to get something useful out of it, while others just don’t, no matter the amount of effort. Maybe our standards/expectations are just vastly different, I don’t know. I’d really like an ELI5 on it.

firesteelrain 3y ago
It’s all in how you prompt it. I had it design an entire process for handling multiple Azure tenants, plans and offerings. It gave suggestions on how to secure the shared services vnet and peer them to the tenants. I find it useful. I have even had to generate code. Fairly accurately too (it even compiles and works)
- dinvlad 3y ago
  Have you tried generating Arm templates too? I think my attempts were unsuccessful. What I have consistent troubles with is it losing the context as I try to guide it through something. And as I try to fix some mistakes, it fixes them and introduces others at the same time. Not sure what I'm doing wrong. This process ends up being so time-consuming and frustrating that it's faster for me to just find some good examples using the new (and awesome!) GitHub search.
  - firesteelrain 3y ago
    Yup! { "$schema": "https://schema.management.azure.com/schemas/2019-08-01/managementGroupDeploymentTemplate.json# https://schema.management.azure.com/schemas/2019-08-01/manag...", "contentVersion": "1.0.0.0", "parameters": { "location": { "type": "string", "defaultValue": "East US", "metadata": { "description": "Location for the resources." } }, "tenantAPlanName": { "type": "string", "metadata": { "description": "Name of Tenant A's plan." } }, "tenantBPlanName": { "type": "string", "metadata": { "description": "Name of Tenant B's plan." } }, "sharedServicesPlanName": { "type": "string", "metadata": { "description": "Name of the Shared Services plan." } } // Add more parameters as per your requirements }, "variables": { // Add variables if needed }, "resources": [ { "apiVersion": "2021-04-01", "type": "Microsoft.Resources/resourceGroups", "name": "[concat('SharedServices-', uniqueString(resourceGroup().id))]", "location": "[parameters('location')]", "properties": {} }, { // Define resources for Tenant A's plan }, { // Define resources for Tenant B's plan }, { // Define resources for the Shared Services plan } ], "outputs": { // Define outputs if needed } } I can get it to fill in the rest. I just go give it my requirements
    - dinvlad 3y ago
      Never seems to work for me, unfortunately. Also the context window is too short so it chokes on giving me large outputs. And if doing it piecemeal, it would (partially) forget what it gave me in previous prompts. I feel like maybe my expectations are too high, but then as mentioned earlier, it’s much more productive for me to go find relevant example(s) on GitHub that have already been tested by a human.

firesteelrain 3y ago

It’s all in how you prompt it. I had it design an entire process for handling multiple Azure tenants, plans and offerings. It gave suggestions on how to secure the shared services vnet and peer them to the tenants. I find it useful. I have even had to generate code. Fairly accurately too (it even compiles and works)

dinvlad 3y ago
Have you tried generating Arm templates too? I think my attempts were unsuccessful. What I have consistent troubles with is it losing the context as I try to guide it through something. And as I try to fix some mistakes, it fixes them and introduces others at the same time. Not sure what I'm doing wrong. This process ends up being so time-consuming and frustrating that it's faster for me to just find some good examples using the new (and awesome!) GitHub search.
- firesteelrain 3y ago
  Yup! { "$schema": "https://schema.management.azure.com/schemas/2019-08-01/managementGroupDeploymentTemplate.json# https://schema.management.azure.com/schemas/2019-08-01/manag...", "contentVersion": "1.0.0.0", "parameters": { "location": { "type": "string", "defaultValue": "East US", "metadata": { "description": "Location for the resources." } }, "tenantAPlanName": { "type": "string", "metadata": { "description": "Name of Tenant A's plan." } }, "tenantBPlanName": { "type": "string", "metadata": { "description": "Name of Tenant B's plan." } }, "sharedServicesPlanName": { "type": "string", "metadata": { "description": "Name of the Shared Services plan." } } // Add more parameters as per your requirements }, "variables": { // Add variables if needed }, "resources": [ { "apiVersion": "2021-04-01", "type": "Microsoft.Resources/resourceGroups", "name": "[concat('SharedServices-', uniqueString(resourceGroup().id))]", "location": "[parameters('location')]", "properties": {} }, { // Define resources for Tenant A's plan }, { // Define resources for Tenant B's plan }, { // Define resources for the Shared Services plan } ], "outputs": { // Define outputs if needed } } I can get it to fill in the rest. I just go give it my requirements
  - dinvlad 3y ago
    Never seems to work for me, unfortunately. Also the context window is too short so it chokes on giving me large outputs. And if doing it piecemeal, it would (partially) forget what it gave me in previous prompts. I feel like maybe my expectations are too high, but then as mentioned earlier, it’s much more productive for me to go find relevant example(s) on GitHub that have already been tested by a human.