• SorryQuick@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    6 days ago

    Yes, and that’s called a harness, which everyone uses these days. The harness increases perceived intelligence (or accuracy) by absurd amounts. You can “teach” (or the equivalent of) LLMs anything with a custom harness.

      • SorryQuick@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        Well the idea is you don’t need to code it yourself, you can have it do it for you. Sure it’ll have bugs the first few times, but humans also make mistakes the until they get the hang of it.

        • sem@piefed.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 days ago

          The difference i guess is that humans are capable of learning and producing better code as they become more expert at it.

          The big tech companies are surely trying to improve AI with these “harnesses” as you call them, and you can try vibe coding them yourself.

          But it seems to me like spending a lot of time adding features to a technology to try to catch edge cases, but the edge cases will never end, and you’ll never be able to use it for anything except rough approximations or bullshit

    • sqw@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      yes lets have the llm be a blurry frontend for a bunch of invisible proprietary harness programs. that surely is a valuable human endeavor

      • SorryQuick@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 days ago

        Because right now LLMs (and potentially other forms of AI) are the only technology capable of doing it. Humans can too, but are much slower and more expensive.