|
|
|
|
|
by temporarely
709 days ago
|
|
In my view CLI is "inherently" more abstract and requires a relatively deeper understanding of the system that is being interacted with. I honestly find it strange one needs to elaborate on this manifest fact: see all the unwashed happily tapping away on their smart phones. Also we're not discussing "systems" rather interfaces. The system is invariant. Take OS X. I know few normies who even know what "terminal" is or what it means and on the other extreme, most of my fellow techies mainly interact with it via a terminal. It's the same system. Training also indicates specialization. Arguably any endeavor requiring specialization is already anti-social, if we consider society in its widest sense. |
|
Also training doesn’t have to be specialization… just like we do basic arithmetic and literacy and (mostly useless and often curated by people with agendas) history we could do basic directory navigation and associated operations, side by side, just to get everyone on the same page, going forward. Now suddenly everyone has access to the social value of sharing their interactions with machines.
Arguably this is what little value LLMs might actually provide, assuming we ever get to the point we can talk one into reliably performing some interaction with the OS for us, then capture that as an output we can share as well.