[HN Gopher] XAI PromptIDE
___________________________________________________________________
XAI PromptIDE
Author : meetpateltech
Score : 129 points
Date : 2023-11-06 16:42 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (x.ai)
(TXT) w3m dump (x.ai)
| qwertox wrote:
| Here are a couple of screen recordings
| https://twitter.com/TobyPhln/status/1721568711168192540
| orliesaurus wrote:
| Postman for prompts?
| turnsout wrote:
| Yeah... how much of an advantage is this over putting your
| prompts under source control?
| m3kw9 wrote:
| Stil no idea what it is
| jejeyyy77 wrote:
| do some research about how these models work and what prompts
| are.
| m3kw9 wrote:
| That won't help
| seanhunter wrote:
| It's the sort of thing an engineering team builds when they
| have way too much time and no idea what to build. There is zero
| reason to use something like this over, say Jupyter notebooks
| and the advantages of notebook are obvious: actual researchers
| are already familiar with it, you can integrate everything into
| your data science workflow, visualise results etc
| BryanBeshore wrote:
| So, you're telling me Twitter engineering was over staffed...
| seanhunter wrote:
| So you're telling me you think x.ai people and twitter
| engineering people are the same...
| machdiamonds wrote:
| It's obvious Twitter was overstaffed but xAI has less than
| 20 employees so definitely not the case there.
| vinni2 wrote:
| Early access is not available in Europe it seems.
| croes wrote:
| >Participation in the early access program is currently limited
| to verified users.
|
| Only paying users.
| waihtis wrote:
| yes, but also geographically restricted
| beepbooptheory wrote:
| If this stuff is so powerful, or going to be so powerful, is
| positioning like this wise? It kinda feels like it is aiming
| squarely at its own obsolescence. That is, if LLMs turn out to
| indeed be "the way forward," than surely the esoteric/specialized
| science of prompt engineering will fall away precisely in step
| with how much better next-gen LLMs are, right?
|
| Or to put another way, what is the ultimate value of LLMs in
| general if they are _not_ aiming to make the very idea of
| "prompt engineering" obsolete?
| jasongill wrote:
| I understand what you are saying. When OpenAI's API was still
| new, there was a LOT of "prompt engineering" required - a lot
| of proper formatting and tricks to get it to produce the
| required output, proper ways of formatting prompts with "few-
| shot" examples, etc. Packages like LangChain sprang up because
| trying to chain together multiple prompts with different inputs
| and outputs was becoming a bear.
|
| But then, within a few months, the LLM's got better and better
| to the point where the average ChatGPT user doesn't need to be
| a "prompt engineer" to get what they want. Sure, there are
| tricks with adding specific phrases to a prompt to get it to do
| a better job, but what we now consider "prompt engineering" and
| what was "prompt engineering" pre-ChatGPT are very different.
|
| LangChain, for example, has reacted by pivoting away from just
| prompt chaining and templating and into an ecosystem for agents
| and automated AI "bots". I think that may be overkill for many
| use cases, and there are good alternatives (Rivet is now my go-
| to) if you still want to build an LLM-powered app that just
| requires a specific logical path and specific inputs and
| outputs, but honestly if I was working at an "AI startup" I
| would probably be trying to focus my time on getting away from
| "prompts" and more just to "doing a good job of what you are
| told".
|
| I do think that "prompts" (especially chat-style conversations)
| lack a lot of the nuance that you need for a production-grade
| app especially when it comes to specific input and output
| formats, etc. Function calling helps a lot but I don't see why
| xAI is focusing on an IDE for writing a great prompt instead of
| building an LLM that can make good, structured output with just
| an "ok" prompt.
|
| The next year will be interesting - it hasn't even been a full
| year since ChatGPT was released, and look how far the industry
| has come since the closed-beta release of GPT-3.
| heisgone wrote:
| For me, I would just like a simple way (no technical
| knowledge) to invoke LLM sub-steps. Exemple "Find the 4
| articles of laws most relevant to this case, then anaylse
| each of those articles separatly". So, a simple non-technical
| way of doing auto-gpt style substeps. This would greatly
| increate ChatGPT precision.
| jejeyyy77 wrote:
| what?
| beepbooptheory wrote:
| Others have commented to maybe help with my bad writing, but:
| I am basically trying to say that the promise of LLM models
| are in the long term at odds with the idea of "prompt
| engineering" even being a thing in, like, two years. Every
| improvement to existing models can only really make such a
| thing more and more obsolete.
|
| Otherwise, what are we even doing here? Expensive regex?
| ianbicking wrote:
| If you want standard responses then presumably LLMs will start
| to converge on those responses. But if you want a non-standard
| response then you have to ask for it, and I think that will
| continue to be a kind of "prompt engineering".
|
| For instance I'm working in math problem generation right now
| and you could imagine saying "make the problem harder" and
| you'll get back... something. But what does "harder" really
| mean? It's very underspecified. If you work in making
| educational material you probably have some much clearer
| criteria, and if you are building a product you may have a
| clear point of view about what you want in the next problem in
| a sequence... and "harder" is just punting on all these
| details.
|
| The tricks may stop being as necessary, but the deciding what
| you want and how to explain what you want seems essential no
| matter how smart the LLM is.
| darkwater wrote:
| If you were to talk to a human that has enough context in the
| problem space, telling them "make it harder" should achieve
| something that makes sense... easily, no? I think that at
| some point a generically trained LLM will be able to do just
| the same. Prompt engineering will probably be a niche for
| security (both blue and red teams).
| numpad0 wrote:
| I suppose it's always a correct decision to vertically
| integrate and invest heavily in tooling, from a pure monopolist
| standpoint. Doing so reduces stakeholders and improve control,
| which should grant more power to management than constantly
| having to succumb to engineering, market or baseline reality.
|
| But e.g. very few laptop manufacturers are even capable of
| designing and fabricating own display panels(not sure Apple
| does?), let alone ones that provide any advantages, so there's
| that.
| nothrowaways wrote:
| Llama 2 is still the most transparent and open source model.
| waynenilsen wrote:
| is there any evidence of this?
| stainablesteel wrote:
| even if this is true, to be fair to elon he donated to openai
| when it was a nonprofit and through some sketchy moves it was
| turned into a for-profit company where his donation should now
| be seen as an investment
| danso wrote:
| To be fair to OpenAI, Musk determined that OpenAI had
| irreparably lost the race to Google and proposed that he be
| made CEO [0]. Musk's public complaints about OpenAI being
| profitable were years[1] after he had decided to abandon
| OpenAI.
|
| > _But in early 2018, Musk told Sam Altman, another OpenAI
| founder, that he believed the venture had fallen fatally
| behind Google, people familiar with the matter said._
|
| > _And Musk proposed a possible solution: He would take
| control of OpenAI and run it himself._
|
| > _Altman and OpenAI's other founders rejected Musk's
| proposal. Musk, in turn, walked away from the company -- and
| reneged on a massive planned donation. The fallout from that
| conflict, culminating in the announcement of Musk's departure
| on Feb 20, 2018, would shape the industry that's changing the
| world, and the company at the heart of it._
|
| [0] https://www.semafor.com/article/03/24/2023/the-secret-
| histor...
|
| [1]
| https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1626516035863212034?s=20
| sundarurfriend wrote:
| > Musk determined
|
| That's a pretty strong way of stating what's basically
| hearsay from a pretty low effort article.
| jampekka wrote:
| Not a fan of elon, but it was the bad old Micro$oft that
| turned OpenAI for-profit.
| redox99 wrote:
| That's absolutely false. It's trivial to prove that OpenLlama
| is both more transparent (details on how it's trained), and
| more open (better license, and public training code).
|
| Llama 2 doesn't even mention the dataset used, so it's not very
| transparent.
| kkielhofner wrote:
| I have serious concerns about anything from X at this point.
|
| At the risk of going into some amateur psychological analysis of
| Elon Musk I think he's pretty well past the point of what happens
| to so many people insulated by wealth, power, influence, their
| carefully crafted bubbles/echo chambers, etc.
|
| For example, for all of his talk of bias I am completely unable
| to get positive and glowing reviews of Tesla stuff out of my X
| feed. Every single day I label the non-stop Tesla, Cybertruck,
| posts from Elon himself, etc as "Not interesting to me". I've
| never given the algorithm any reason to think I want this stuff
| repeatedly shoved in my face and actually quite the contrary as
| I've said.
|
| I've been doing this for at least a month and yet they persist.
| It's pretty clear he has his "thumb on the scale" (to put it
| mildly) for his own ample self-interests, ego, politics, etc.
|
| Plenty of people and platforms are of course prone to the same
| issues but from what I've seen this is so gallingly obvious with
| him and X it's borderline insulting to those of us that have a
| modicum of understanding of what's going on here.
|
| I think it's very highly likely this will be reflected in
| anything he or X produces.
| WORMS_EAT_WORMS wrote:
| Would you mind posting a screenshot of your phone screentime?
| Just curious
| kkielhofner wrote:
| I overwhelmingly use X on desktop (browser) so I'm not sure
| how this would be helpful.
| starik36 wrote:
| Unfollow people that follow him and you won't get this content.
| My content used to be all over the place as well. After I've
| done the pruning, now it's various people talking about topics
| that I care about. Obviously it's not perfect - things leak
| through, but far better.
|
| Same with Facebook, my feed is now pretty much photos and news
| from friends and family.
| extr wrote:
| It's your algorithm. I mostly see content where he's being
| dunked on or Tesla is the butt of a joke.
| agloe_dreams wrote:
| This is easily explained but not in a positive way. X
| Subscribers get up-ranked in replies and For You. 99% of anyone
| who would subscribe to X are Elon Fans. As a result, you get
| the fanboys.
| phh wrote:
| I was going to say that I never saw anything like that, but I
| remembered I followed Musk's advice the day he recommended it:
| I disabled recommendations and only use the "follows" view.
| araes wrote:
| What? If that's Musk's own advice ... then how is that not
| the default? O_o
|
| "Our default sucks, use this workaround" "Except you bought
| the place"
| misiti3780 wrote:
| I dont have that experience at all, and im a tesla owner. I see
| more negative tesla stuff than positive, especially about stock
| value and cybertruck quality problems.
| numpad0 wrote:
| I think clicking "Not interested" button is optional. You can
| just straight up block the content, and adblock any "You might
| also like".
|
| This is my bigoted view, but my interpretation of "you are the
| product" principle in freemium model is that they pay you in
| perceived value. Not the other way around, nor in cash. So,
| onus is on them to bring you values you recognize.
| Vicinity9635 wrote:
| This is just an ad hominem pretending to be civil discourse.
| The topic is XAI, and you're talking about Musk instead.
| bilsbie wrote:
| Could someone explain this like I'm a time traveler from 2010?
| jareklupinski wrote:
| Eclipse, but for Python instead of Java, and a textbox instead
| of Bonzi Buddy
| paxys wrote:
| Seems pretty...underwhelming as the first product of x.ai
| considering the initial announcement of its founding came with
| such a splash. This is more like someone trying to piggy-back off
| the popularity of LLMs with a trivial tool than driving the space
| forward in any way.
| Kiro wrote:
| Isn't Grok their first product? This seems to be tooling for
| their main product.
| markush_ wrote:
| The docs on https://x.ai/ide/docs gives away some of the source
| code. It's interesting that they are running Python in the
| browser.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-06 21:01 UTC)