Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by runevault 830 days ago
to my mind at least part of the issue here is human communication languages are fundamentally lossy by nature. Everything has too many meanings and requires inference. This is why when able to communicate with code it gets so much easier because it has to be exactly right or the computer fails. And at least because it is consistent we can debug and fix that communication and once that is done it will work with reasonable consistency.
1 comments

That describes a limitation of computers (and current interfaces to them) though.

Requiring humans to describe stuff "unambiguosly" is the easy cop out to that.

Getting computers to handle the ambiguity and resolve it as good as humans is what would be really amplifying. LLMs are a good step to that, compared to a regular programming language/interface.

It's also a limitation of human-human communication, and why nation's have ambassadors (who presumably have a shared context from which to start from when dealing with a foreign nation).
I don't think diplomacy and ambassadors are there to handle ambiguity in communication.

There are there to handle conflicting interests and goals.

To that end, ambiguity in communication is something they use on purpose, not something they're there to solve.