Re:The art of programming and why I won't use LLM
by limit499karma on Monday August 26, 2024 @08:28AM
(#41356479)
> black box
Actually the opacity of the abstraction layer is the core of the issue. First we note that opacity is a measure in both the inner-workings of the 'box' and orthogonally (in context of LLMs) a measure of deterministic outcome.
Programming, it is asserted by some of us, is exactly the act of instructing a deterministic 'black' box.
Peer-coding with an LLM is the act of cajoling a mechanism to hopefully consistently produce the input to a sensible "blackbox". It is not programming, it is getting help. Now if the help was 100% reliable, we could discuss programming the helper.
The other day I had a vision of the future AI whisperer in the corporate setting. They wear capes of varied colors and possibly sport a wand. "It's an art you see".
Actually the opacity of the abstraction layer is the core of the issue. First we note that opacity is a measure in both the inner-workings of the 'box' and orthogonally (in context of LLMs) a measure of deterministic outcome.
Programming, it is asserted by some of us, is exactly the act of instructing a deterministic 'black' box.
Peer-coding with an LLM is the act of cajoling a mechanism to hopefully consistently produce the input to a sensible "blackbox". It is not programming, it is getting help. Now if the help was 100% reliable, we could discuss programming the helper.
The other day I had a vision of the future AI whisperer in the corporate setting. They wear capes of varied colors and possibly sport a wand. "It's an art you see".