It was a thing in the sense that the promptfondlers were trying to portray prompting as a matter of fine technique and skill (as opposed to dumb luck mixed with trial and error with a few general guidelines that half work). It was not a thing then and is still not now in the sense that prompting has none of the skill or precision or verifiability or reliability of actual programming.
scruiser
This post has prompted me to give a reminder that one of the authors of AI 2027 predicted back in 2021 that "prompt programming" would be a thing by now.
On the other hand, it doesn't matter what Elon actually thinks, because he would probably go through with the lawsuit given any available pretext because he's mad he got kicked out and couldn't commercialize OpenAI exactly like Sam tried.
I knew the exact couple you were talking about before I read any additional comments. They seem to show up in the news like clockwork... do they have a publicist or PR agent looking for newspapers in need of garbage filler puff pieces? If anything, going to the white house is a step up from there normal pattern of self promotion.
Yeah they are normally all over anything with the word "market" in it, with an almost religious like belief in market's ability to solve things.
My suspicion is that the writer has picked up some anti-Ukrainian sentiment from the US right wing (which in order to rationalize and justify Trump's constant sucking up to Putin has looked for any and every angle to tear Ukraine down). And this anti-Ukrainian sentiment has somehow trumped their worship of markets... Checking back through their posting history to try to discern their exact political alignment... it's hard to say, they've got the Scott Alexander thing going on where they use disconnected historical examples crossed with a bad analogies crossed with misappropriated terms from philosophy to make points that you can't follow unless you already know their real intended context. So idk.
The slatestarcodex is discussing the unethical research performed on changemyview. Of course, the most upvoted take is that they don't see the harm or why it should be deemed unethical. Lots of upvoted complaints about IRBs and such. It's pretty gross.
That disclaimer feels like parody given that LLMs have existed under a decade and only been popular a few years. Like it's mocking all the job ads that ask for 10+ years of experience on a programming language or library that has literally only existed for 7 years.
Using just the author's name as input feels deliberately bad. Like the promptfondlers generally emphasize how important prompting it right is, its hard to imagine them going deliberately minimalistic in prompt.
AlphaFold exists, so computational complexity is a lie and the AGI will surely find an easy approximation to the Schrodinger Equation that surpasses all Density Functional Theory approximations and lets it invent radically new materials without any experimentation!
nanomachines son
(no really, the sci-fi version of nanotech where nanomachines can do anything is Eliezer's main scenario for the AGI to boostrap to Godhood. He's been called out multiple times on why drexler's vision for nanotech ignores physics, so he's since updated to diamondoid bacteria (but he still thinks nanotech).)
~~The predictions of slopworld 2035 are coming true!~~
It starts out seeming like a funny but petty and irrelevant criticism of his kitchen skill and product choices, but then beautifully transitions that into an accurate criticism of OpenAI.