[HN Gopher] Show HN: Prompt Engineering Jobs
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: Prompt Engineering Jobs
Author : Oras
Score : 57 points
Date : 2023-04-02 14:48 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (prompt-engineering-jobs.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (prompt-engineering-jobs.com)
| amrocha wrote:
| "Prompt engineering" isn't real. What are you engineering? You're
| throwing shit at the wall and hoping it sticks.
|
| Software Engineering is kinda fake, especially in industry, but
| at least that's an actual discipline.
|
| "AI monkey" is a better description
| williadc wrote:
| > You're throwing shit at the wall and hoping it sticks.
|
| A more charitable description might be "You're employing the
| scientific method to extract value from GPT-like systems." Just
| like in science, with time you're developing intuition for how
| the underlying system works, but you still have to run the
| experiments.
| haxton wrote:
| Would you prefer "LLM Reverse Engineer" then?
| monero-xmr wrote:
| "Poke this box different ways until the right stuff leaks out"
| sokoloff wrote:
| "Jiggle this bag of parts until the device assembles itself."
| simonw wrote:
| Classic XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1838/
| game_the0ry wrote:
| Nice.
|
| Given the wild popularity of posts about prompt engineering
| "jobs" paying +$300k, it was only a matter of time for an indie
| hacker to create a job board specifically for this type of job.
| KomoD wrote:
| Is this a serious website? "Prompt Engineer 20 years of
| experience"
| tough wrote:
| April fool's late submission?
| tough wrote:
| Seems real tho, redirects to actual jobs. Guessing its a
| scraper, maybe some of the jobs are fake like the one asking
| 20y experience lol.
|
| I want to be a Cannabis Prompt Engineer now
| https://www.xing.com/jobs/muenchen-remote-cannabis-ki-prompt...
| Oras wrote:
| It is scraping jobs at the moment, you are right.
|
| I'm afraid these kind of job postings asking for experience
| longer than technology will always be there.
|
| I have removed the post now.
| WolfOliver wrote:
| The goal should be to be able to just talk your model without any
| engineering. If you as a normal user can not interact with an AI
| then the AI is just not smart.
| simonw wrote:
| "AI" isn't smart. Doesn't mean it's not useful if you know how
| to use it.
| roundandround wrote:
| I hope Andrew Ng was correct that a great many methods end up
| largely equivalent given the same amount of input because the
| current methods deliver a rather useless result.
|
| With a google search you are getting citations and stuck
| finding the truly good ones that truly match, with chatgpt
| you are getting an answer from someone who read all those
| citations and treats them all as equally good.
|
| I think the real problem was to get the most perfect
| citations given your specific question. We can forgive the
| error since it took the web a few years to discover that best
| is rarely a fresh bit of blog spam by a moron who has read
| everything and refuses to cite sources. So GPT is
| convincingly as good as a human blogger yet not as useful as
| a less human emulating tool.
| simonw wrote:
| Here's my rebuttal to the inevitable flood of "prompt engineering
| is dumb / a bug not a feature" comments:
| https://simonwillison.net/2023/Feb/21/in-defense-of-prompt-e...
| darkteflon wrote:
| Really enjoying your writing on LLMs. Thanks Simon.
| Oras wrote:
| OP here, I see lots of comments about prompt engineering thinking
| in the context of asking one question to get the answer.
|
| In that perspective, I understand why many people think it is
| useless. However, if you tried to make a chain of
| functions/calls, or worked with a tool like LangChain [0] you
| will see its importance.
|
| Ex: "Which stock had better performance in the last 6 months,
| Tesla or Microsoft?"
|
| A question like this would check:
|
| - Understanding this is a financial question.
|
| - Get the stock ticker (symbol) for each one.
|
| - Use an API to get their performance history in the last 6
| months.
|
| - Compare.
|
| - Return the answer.
|
| [0] https://github.com/hwchase17/langchain
| submeta wrote:
| When it comes to making ChatGPT solve technical problems, my
| observation is that you need to be good at writing (technical)
| requirements to be good at writing prompts.
|
| When I assign a task to a (human) developer, the results depend
| on two things: First, how good the developer is, second, and more
| importantly, how well and clearly I am expressing the
| requirements. And this is also true for ChatGPT. With very
| precise requirements I get very good results.
|
| So prompt engineering is like writing good requirements, and that
| also requires understanding the problem domain.
| ChatPGT wrote:
| writing/reading/understanding good requirements is a really
| nice skill to have in this decade. I have a peer that just CAN
| NOT interpret what is going on so he always need to schedule a
| meeting and it pisses me off hard. "are you able to talk right
| now?" sigh
| romland wrote:
| I'm convinced this will be a common job description for a few
| years, after which it will flow into and just become a part of
| any other job. Like Googling. I mean, we all know it does take
| some domain knowledge to be able to use it in your job. Also just
| like Googling.
|
| We've started calling it LLMing (llemming).
|
| Edit: Specifying prompts is leaning towards specification. I am
| not saying googling is that. I'm saying that, like googling, it
| will just be a part of the job in a not distant future.
| blibble wrote:
| "boilerplate generator"
| scottiebarnes wrote:
| All the job listings seem to be actual software/ML engineering
| roles and not really "prompt engineering" roles.
| photonbeam wrote:
| More like technician
| devmunchies wrote:
| Many think prompt engineering is just like being good at writing
| Google searches, where my job is to be good at knowing "how
| Google/GPT4 thinks"--good at writing a single query.
|
| However, I think prompt engineering will evolve to be an actual
| technical role, akin to Data Engineering (the people who make the
| systems, pipelines, ETL jobs, etc for the data).
|
| Prompt engineers will build systems that facilitate prompt
| _generation_. Meaning that prompts will be dynamically generated
| or at least partially generated with modifications or additions
| to the raw user prompt.
|
| It's the difference to being able to write HTML vs being able to
| do all the backend work to dynamically generate the HTML for _my_
| Amazon homepage (including the performance benchmarks and other
| strategic requirements), for example.
| sgrove wrote:
| I've been doing the same thing with a number of projects,
| building chains of prompts from one api call to another e.g.
| for ConjureUI (self-creating, iterable UIs that come into
| existence, get used, then disappear)
| https://youtu.be/xgi1YX6HQBw how it works to generate a full
| self-contained react component:
|
| 1. Take user task
|
| 2. Pass it to a prompt that requests a Product UI description
| of a component
|
| 3. Pass 1+2 to another that asks for which npm packages to use
|
| 4. Pass 1+2+3 to a templated prompt to write the code in a
| constrained manner
|
| 5. Run 4 in a sandbox to see if there are errors, if so pass it
| back to #4, looping
|
| It's currently quite slow, but that's an implementation detail
| I think.
| simonw wrote:
| Crucially important that engineers who are building systems
| like that that work by concatenating prompts together have a
| very solid understanding of prompt injection attacks.
| sorokod wrote:
| I have an idea what skills are required to dynamicly generate
| HTML and how to measure quality.
|
| Can you share something similar for "prompt engineering" ?
| seydor wrote:
| I don't think it will evolve at all, because models will just
| become better at understanding what people mean. There's no
| point in trying to be a better prompter as a competitive
| advantage.
|
| Already, chatGPT and bing can both give great on-topic answers
| to 3 word queries. and the fact that you can infinitely refine
| it is great
|
| OTOH i think there is space for developing GUIs for prompts.
| Makes them more engaging
| addisonl wrote:
| > Already, chatGPT and bing can both give great on-topic
| answers to 3 word queries. and the fact that you can
| infinitely refine it is great
|
| You're completely ignoring the system prompts that
| OpenAI/Bing have already set up so your "3 word query" works
| as you intend. These system prompts are what prompt
| engineering is all about.
| maxbondabe wrote:
| I'm working on a prompt engineering product at a stealth mode
| startup. Would it be possible for me to pick your brain
| sometime? I'd like to understand more about your workflow, and
| how our product could fit into that.
|
| No pressure. My email is in my profile.
| xkcd-sucks wrote:
| My prediction that we'll have psychologists for computers before
| having a mechanistic understanding of cognition seems to be
| coming true :)
| swader999 wrote:
| Feels for the people that made a living by googling for stuff.
| They are going to have to upgrade.
| meghan_rain wrote:
| lmao at the job saying "20 years of experience in prompt
| engineering required"
| G_z9 wrote:
| Prompt engineering. Just stick engineering at the end of your job
| description and all your self consciousness about how useless you
| are will go away.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-02 23:00 UTC)