[zahlman]

> Can we formalize that abstraction such that the prompt is an exact specification, just, at a super high level?

... And you want a representation of that abstraction to persist on disk?

... But it shouldn't be "text"?

Why not?

And how will you communicate it? You want to prompt in lossy, error-prone, inexact text, and then trust that an opaque binary blob correctly represents the formalization of what you meant? Or go through feedback cycles of trying to correct it with more prompting, but without the ability to edit manually?

> but no amount of text-generation gets around the fact that maybe text generation is... not... what we should be doing, actually.

Well, sure. But that isn't a problem with text; it's a problem with boilerplate in our designs.

[ajkjk]

you'll communicate it as text or binary data, of course; you just won't operate on it in that form (necessarily).