[HN Gopher] The future of programming: Research at CHI 2023
___________________________________________________________________
The future of programming: Research at CHI 2023
Author : azhenley
Score : 93 points
Date : 2023-04-27 17:26 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (austinhenley.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (austinhenley.com)
| kleiba wrote:
| Note that CHI is not a programming language or software
| engineering conference, but a conference in _human-computer
| interaction_ : it's the ACM Conference on Human Factors in
| Computing Systems.
| gjvc wrote:
| in Europe we call it HCI. In America, they put humans second,
| so they call it CHI.
| asoneth wrote:
| > in Europe we call it HCI
|
| Well CHI is being held in Europe this year, so apparently you
| don't!
|
| But more seriously, the field is "HCI" everywhere, including
| in America, and has been for at least thirty years. I have
| vague memories of hearing the story about why the initial ACM
| SIGCHI folks didn't go with HCI at the time but I can't
| recall. Anyway, it wasn't long after CHI was founded that
| basically everyone was using "HCI" on both sides of the
| Atlantic.
| gjvc wrote:
| so why hasn't it changed, then?
| Ar-Curunir wrote:
| Er what? It's the Conference for HcI = CHI
| dr_dshiv wrote:
| Ahem, at CHI, humans are at the center.
| throwaway4good wrote:
| I am surprised how quickly the HCI researchers jumped on chatgpt
| / prompt engineering.
| gjvc wrote:
| they are chasing that research funding money
| cflewis wrote:
| Sadly I think this is a significant part of it. It is so very
| hard to convince anyone in CS to fund unsexy projects. I
| think the majority of innovation on the unsexy things happens
| internally at the large tech companies.
| jasonhong wrote:
| Or maybe their chasing it because it's a highly relevant
| topic that might impact lots of people around the world, you
| know, a kind of human-computer interaction.
| radarsat1 wrote:
| Why? Natural language interaction with computers is like the
| holy grail of human-computer interaction, of _course_ they
| jumped on it.
| gwern wrote:
| Perhaps they could learn something about HCI from ChatGPT...?
| teragramma wrote:
| Oh man, wild to see an article about the biggest conference in my
| field pop up on HN.
|
| It's surprising how quickly HCI people managed to pivot to AI
| stuff - the paper deadline for this conference was Sept. 15,
| 2022, which was about a month before ChatGPT was even released.
| So... expect to see even more AI at next year's conference in
| Honolulu!
| dtagames wrote:
| This paper is quite good: Why Johnny Can't Prompt: How Non-AI
| Experts Try (and Fail) to Design LLM Prompts
| textninja wrote:
| I'm not fond of the provocative title because prompting is easy
| and only getting easier; the advice seems to be predicated on
| the use of relatively deficient LLMs. I don't doubt there will
| still be operator skill involved, but I anticipate the state of
| the art for LLMs ability to adapt to "bad" prompts will outpace
| our ability to learn to prompt them effectively.
|
| Disclaimer: I watched the video but didn't read the paper.
| version_five wrote:
| I think you're right about prompts getting "easier" but I
| don't think it's a good thing. I expect it will evolve like
| google search. Where initially there are ways to increase
| specificity, or at least introduce enough randomness to get
| some different results, it will converge to something that
| ignores most of what you prompt and gives you what OpenAI
| wants you to see. That's really the only way adapting to
| "bad" prompts even could work
| domoritz wrote:
| I think there are a lot of instances where writing prompts
| can be hard just because it's hard to express your needs in
| words sometimes. Bad prompts are often ambiguous and there is
| only so much even a perfect LLM can correct for. That is,
| until we have direct connections to our brains.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-27 23:00 UTC)