It's hard enough for humans to take natural-language descriptions of a problem to be solved (that is well within human capabilities) and turn them into human-wo

It's hard enough for humans to take natural-language descriptions of a problem to be solved (that is well within human capabilities) and turn them into human-workable solutions without a significant process of back and forth to get the requirements clear. Getting a computer, within the next decade or two, to do better, doesn't seem realistic—not because I think it is impossible that we will have a computer fully capable of parsing natural human language into internal representations of the concepts it represents with high fidelity, but simply because humans are bad at communicating. Tell me you've never, ever had a project described to you by someone who was horribly nonspecific—or even outright wrong—in their description of what they need. (If you can truthfully do so, I can easily find you a dozen people who can't—starting with myself.) Human language is woefully inadequate to convey the breadth and depth of human experience, needs, wants, requirements, etc. This is why we invented programming languages in the first place.