dosgame.club is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
dosgame.club is the fediverse home of <a href="https://dosgameclub.com">DOS Game Club</a>. People here are all in one way or another involved with retro computing or retro gaming.

Administered by:

Server stats:

29
active users

A lot of the current hype around LLMs revolves around one core idea, which I blame on Star Trek:

Wouldn't it be cool if we could use natural language to control things?

The problem is that this is, at the fundamental level, a terrible idea.

There's a reason that mathematics doesn't use English. There's a reason that every professional field comes with its own flavour of jargon. There's a reason that contracts are written in legalese, not plain natural language. Natural language is really bad at being unambiguous.

When I was a small child, I thought that a mature civilisation would evolve two languages. A language of poetry, that was rich in metaphor and delighted in ambiguity, and a language of science that required more detail and actively avoided ambiguity. The latter would have no homophones, no homonyms, unambiguous grammar, and so on.

Programming languages, including the ad-hoc programming languages that we refer to as 'user interfaces' are all attempts to build languages like the latter. They allow the user to unambiguously express intent so that it can be carried out. Natural languages are not designed and end up being examples of the former.

When I interact with a tool, I want it to do what I tell it. If I am willing to restrict my use of natural language to a clear and unambiguous subset, I have defined a language that is easy for deterministic parsers to understand with a fraction of the energy requirement of a language model. If I am not, then I am expressing myself ambiguously and no amount of processing can possibly remove the ambiguity that is intrinsic in the source, except a complete, fully synchronised, model of my own mind that knows what I meant (and not what some other person saying the same thing at the same time might have meant).

The hard part of programming is not writing things in some language's syntax, it's expressing the problem in a way that lacks ambiguity. LLMs don't help here, they pick an arbitrary, nondeterministic, option for the ambiguous cases. In C, compilers do this for undefined behaviour and it is widely regarded as a disaster. LLMs are built entirely out of undefined behaviour.

There are use cases where getting it wrong is fine. Choosing a radio station or album to listen to while driving, for example. It is far better to sometimes listen to the wrong thing than to take your attention away from the road and interact with a richer UI for ten seconds. In situations where your hands are unavailable (for example, controlling non-critical equipment while performing surgery, or cooking), a natural-language interface is better than no interface. It's rarely, if ever, the best.

Martijn Frazer

@david_chisnall the only reason it's done like this in Star Trek is because it's not a crew running a spaceship, it's a bunch of actors in a TV show. And it wouldn't make for very good TV to have people stare at screens and press buttons.

The crew aren't talking to the computers and vice versa, they're talking to the audience so they know what's going on.

It's beyond mad to retrofit this paradigm onto real tech that real people are trying to use to do real work.

@Tijn @david_chisnall We have been working on the retro fit since the DARPA “put that there” experiments of the 1960s. I have personally used speech recognition software to control computers since the 1990s. Agent based AI systems have been around for 20 years. LLMs are a dead end in this area but there’s been a lot of research and some progress in the last 60 years.

LLMs will play out, hopefully soon, and we will return to domain specific multi modal agent approaches again.