Great question. I would love to hear the devs thoughts here. This is one of those questions where my intuition tells me there may be a really great "first principles" type of answer, but I don't know it myself.
per the end of the readme:
- one step to go from a spec to writing code, run code, debugging itself, install packages, and deploying the code
- creates "ephemeral UI" on demand
Jira?
Only slightly joking. It really sounds like we're moving in the direction of engineers being a more precise technical version of a PM, but then engineers could just learn to speak business and we don't need PMs.
Our editor isn't a regular coding editor. You don't actually write code with e2b. You write technical specs and then collaborate with an AI agent. Imagine it more like having a virtual developer at your disposal 24/7. It's built on a completely new paradigms enabled by LLMs. This enables to unlock a lot of new use cases and features but at the same time there's a lot that needs to be built.
Because funky brackets are confusing.
If I want to change 1 character of a generated source file, can I just go do that or will I have to figure out how to prompt the change in natural language?
It's in the frustration valley between WYSIWYG and just writing code. The worst of both worlds.
And over time, people will discover some basic phrases and keywords they can use to get certain results from the AI, and find out what sentence structures work best for getting a desired outcome. These will become standard practices and get passed along to other prompt engineers. And eventually they will give the standard a name, so they don’t have to explain it every time. Maybe even version schemes, so humans can collaborate amongst themselves more effectively. And then some entrepreneurs will sell you courses and boot camps on how to speak to AI effectively. And jobs will start asking for applicants to have knowledge of this skill set, with years of experience.
This just sounds like a language that is hard to learn, undocumented, and hard to debug
Although you may know about LLMs, you might specialize in speaking to specific models and know how to get optimal results based on their nuances.
You could tell me, in the most painstaking detail, what you want me to paint, and I still couldn't paint it. You can take any random person on the street and tell them exactly what to type and they'd be able to "program".
For example, the last ai company installer I just clicked "decline" to (a few minutes ago) says that you give it permission to download malware, including viruses and trojans, onto your computer and that you agree to pay the company if you infect other people and tarnish their reputation because of it. Literally. It was a very popular service too. I didn't even get to the IP section
edit: those terms aren't on their website, so I can't link to them. They are hidden in that tiny, impossible to read box during setup for the desktop installer