Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

For one, GPT-4 requires far less prompt engineering and generally interprets intent better.

The advantage of using English (natural language that is), the humans around you tend to speak it. I don't naturally speak powershell. Instead I want a script that searches for particular filenames, under a particular size, between a particular date in a directory path I specify. I told GPT I wanted that and in a few seconds it dumped out what I needed. It wrote the script in a formal language, which is then interpreted by the machine in an even more formal manner. Let the code deal with accuracy, and lets let language models argue back and forth with humans on intent.




> The advantage of using English (natural language that is), the humans around you tend to speak it.

This is true, but of limited utility. English is so bad at this sort of thing that even native-speaking humans are constantly misunderstanding each other. Especially when it comes to describing things and giving instructions.

That's why we have more formal languages (even ignoring programming languages) for when we need to speak with precision.


That's the other nice thing about ChatGPT - if you say it something and it misunderstands, you can correct it by saying, "no, actually, what I meant is ...". Which, again, is how people generally do that kind of thing outside of programming. The advantage is that you're still remaining on a much higher level of abstraction.

As far as formal languages... GPT doesn't know Lojban well, presumably because of its very small presence in the training data (and dearth of material in general). But it would be interesting to see how training on that specifically would turn out.


> Which, again, is how people generally do that kind of thing outside of programming.

Yes, and with people, that's insufficient if you really need confidence of understanding.

There's a reason that lawyers speak legalese, doctors speak medicalese, etc. These are highly structured languages to minimize confusion.

Even in less technical interactions, when you need to be sure that you understand what someone else is saying, you are taught to rephrase what they said and tell it back to them for confirmation. And there's still a large margin of error even then.

This is why, whenever I have an important conversation at work, I always send an email to the person telling them what I understood from our exchange. In part to check if I understood correctly, but also so that I have a record of the exchange to cover my ass if things go sideways because we didn't understand each other, but thought we did.


Every text interface will eventually include a half baked implementation of a programming language.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: