←back to thread

Nobody knows how to build with AI yet

(worksonmymachine.substack.com)
526 points Stwerner | 3 comments | 19 Jul 25 15:45 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Flatcircle ◴[19 Jul 25 16:30 UTC] No.44616899[source]▶
My theory on AI is it's the next iteration of google search, a better more conversational, base layer over all the information that exists on the internet.

Of course some people will lose jobs just like what happened to several industries when search became ubiquitous. (newspapers, phone books, encyclopedias, travel agents)

But IMHO this isn't the existential crisis people think it is.

It's just a tool. Smart, clever people can do lots of cool stuff with tools.

But you still have to use it,

Search has just become Chat.

You used to have to search, now you chat and it does the searching, and more!

replies(9): >>44616955 #>>44616960 #>>44616976 #>>44617019 #>>44617060 #>>44617065 #>>44617099 #>>44620763 #>>44623695 #
ivanjermakov ◴[19 Jul 25 16:39 UTC] No.44616976[source]▶
> Search has just become Chat

I think chat-like LLM interfacing is not the most efficient way. There has to be a smarter way.

replies(5): >>44617027 #>>44617074 #>>44617423 #>>44620491 #>>44622026 #
1. mmcconnell1618 ◴[19 Jul 25 23:34 UTC] No.44620491[source]▶
English and other languages come with lots of ambiguity and assumptions. A significant benefit of programming languages is they have explicit rules for how they will be converted into a running program. An LLM can take many paths from the same starting prompt and deliver vastly different output.
replies(2): >>44622110 #>>44676256 #
2. ip26 ◴[20 Jul 25 04:58 UTC] No.44622110[source]▶
I do agree… perhaps the thing to do is write fragments of the program, like the start and end, asking it to complete the middle. If you have precisely described how the output will be printed, for example, then you have essentially formally specified how the data should be organized…
3. Anamon ◴[24 Jul 25 21:15 UTC] No.44676256[source]▶
A nice article on this was in the January issue of the Communications of the ACM [1]. With a reference to a piece by Dijkstra predicting that this is never going to be effective, back in 1979.

Being able to write code in a programming language is a feature, not a flaw. If we had always had to program in natural language, the precision and unambiguity of programming languages would be an eagerly welcomed revolution.

[1] https://cacm.acm.org/opinion/on-program-synthesis-and-large-...