Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

At first, prompting seemed to be a temporary workaround for getting the most out of large language models. But over time, it's become critical to the way we interact with AI. On the Lightcone Podcast, Garry, Harj, Diana, and Jared break down what they've learned from working with hundreds...

352,522 просмотров • 1 год назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 11

Фото профиля Y Combinator
Y Combinator1 год назад

Tune in:

Фото профиля The Rundown AI
The Rundown AI1 год назад

If you're not learning AI in 2025, you're falling behind. Join 1,000,000+ early adopters reading and learn AI in just 5 minutes a day (for free).

Фото профиля Erik Nomitch
Erik Nomitch1 год назад

@LightconePod Prompt engineering will persist when you consider that everything from emails to legal documents can be thought of as prompts. LLMs need guidance - with language - to achieve a goal. Not all guidance is created equal.

Фото профиля $MIA
$MIA1 год назад

@LightconePod Can't prompt forever, autonomy ftw 🤖

Фото профиля Madhav Shroff
Madhav Shroff1 год назад

@LightconePod 👀

Фото профиля AI Capital
AI Capital1 год назад

@LightconePod Prompting is now an art form, not just a hack. We’re witnessing the evolution of how we collaborate with AI. Count us intrigued.

Фото профиля Lucas Dickey
Lucas Dickey1 год назад

@LightconePod If you're into this episode, check out @clairevo's show "How I AI", or this recent YouTube video (and new channel) for yours truly. I'm open sourcing and sharing code as much as I can as I go.

Фото профиля erna
erna1 год назад

@LightconePod good podcast

Фото профиля Ros Markov
Ros Markov1 год назад

Prompt engineering has clear limitations. It's not an exact science, often inefficient, and challenging to maintain consistency amid frequent frontier model updates. Even established techniques like Few-Shot prompting and Chain-of-Thought reasoning remain error-prone. For custom tasks absent from model training corpora, prompt engineering typically delivers lower accuracy than custom model training or traditional ML methods that offer greater efficiency.

Фото профиля Alex 🇩🇰
Alex 🇩🇰1 год назад

@LightconePod If you're prompting a lot and need a better tool than a simple chat interface, please check out @AIFlowChat

Фото профиля ras
ras1 год назад

@LightconePod on the topic of llm personality, i recently gave the top models the big 5 personality test. it really helped me understand when to go to which llm and why

Похожие видео

When Mudith Jayasekara and I met Gabe Pereyra, we were expecting just another vanilla intro call and instead had the best yarn about research, the state of LLMs, and where intelligence is actually heading. It's rare to meet a founder this deep in the weeds who's also building for one of the most important verticals in this new age of intelligence So it was awesome to sit down with Gabe for an extended discussion on what it take to build agents that can reliably complete work over hours, days, or even longer? We talked about why agents today struggle with search and long context windows and how techniques like KV-cache compaction, synthetic data, and continual learning could help. 0:00 Introduction 0:36 Getting legal agents to review the whole data room 2:08 Data rooms larger than any context window 5:28 How far open-source models can go 7:58 Where specialist models fit in legal AI 10:59 Training legal models when client data is off-limits 13:06 Teaching a model how a law firm works 13:59 What belongs in context vs. model weights 15:36 From firm-wide AI to a model for every lawyer 18:37 What training adds beyond retrieving the right cases 20:26 Why context windows have plateaued 24:01 How models could learn continuously on the job 26:12 Can AI recursively improve AI research? 27:07 Research agents can run experiments but not choose them 30:00 Why open-ended research is hard to train 33:47 Why deployment, not intelligence, is the bottleneck 35:08 The cost of frontier intelligence 36:59 Different neolabs, different paths to intelligence 39:26 Using open datasets to compare research methods 41:13 Conclusion

Charlie O'Neill

92,869 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

From Eric Vishria on how the top AI founders are building products completely opposite of the SaaS era: "One of the things that is really different in the AI world versus the SaaS world, is that in the SaaS world, over and over again, you had people who really understood the customer. And the problem. And then they understood a domain. They understood what the technology was more or less capable of. But it wasn't a real question of if you could build something or not. For example, take Salesforce, Workday, and ServiceNow. CRM existed before Salesforce. HR management existed before Workday. Same thing with ServiceNow. So in every case, Salesforce followed Siebel. Workday followed Peoplesoft. ServiceNow followed Peregrine and Remedy, and others. So they were just kind of, cloud SaaS versions of the prior generation product. They just understood the customers. They understood the problem. And they were just like, here's a better version. And that evolved a little bit over time in SaaS land. But that's what it is. And so product development in that way was done by people who really understood the customer and the problems. And then just took advantage of the next wave. And this is almost diametrically opposite of product development in the AI era. When I look at the teams that are having the most success today, they have intimate knowledge of the models. They are right on the frontier of understanding which models are better at what, and why, and when. And what they're going to be good at and what they're not going to be good at. And what they're spending their time on, is figuring out how do I apply this capability of this model to this domain or to this user. So they're actually working inside out or technology out, versus customer problem in. And of course, they understand the customer problem. And a lot of times they have firsthand knowledge of it. But they're really close to the metal and capability, and they're applying it. And I think this is a really different way to develop products than in SaaS. I started my career as a product manager a long time ago, and it's almost the complete opposite of everything you learned. "Listen to the customer, understand it, then bring it back to the engineering and product teams." If you did that right now, ask a bunch of customers what they want out of AI, and you brought it back, for the most part, it may not be possible today with today's technology. Whereas the teams that are winning right now really understand the technology and are applying it out. And so I think this reversal matters. I think it's a big difference in terms of how companies are getting built. And maybe even the types of entrepreneurs that will be successful. I'm not sure. You're seeing some real change there. Look at the Bret Taylor's at Sierra. That's a super, super technical founder who really gets it. Brett and Clay really get it. You look at Michael and his co-founders at Cursor. They're super technical founders and they get it. They all really understand what these things can and can't do. And that's a pretty different dynamic relative to the way the best SaaS companies got built." Link in bio for the full conversation going deep on the current class of startups going from zero to $100m+ in ARR within 12 months.

The Peel

209,752 просмотров • 1 год назад