Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

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...

352,250 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)

11 Comments

Y Combinator's profile picture
Y Combinator1 year ago

Tune in:

The Rundown AI's profile picture
The Rundown AI1 year ago

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).

Erik Nomitch's profile picture
Erik Nomitch1 year ago

@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.

$MIA's profile picture
$MIA1 year ago

@LightconePod Can't prompt forever, autonomy ftw 🤖

Madhav Shroff's profile picture
Madhav Shroff1 year ago

@LightconePod 👀

AI Capital's profile picture
AI Capital1 year ago

@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.

Lucas Dickey's profile picture
Lucas Dickey1 year ago

@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.

erna's profile picture
erna1 year ago

@LightconePod good podcast

Ros Markov's profile picture
Ros Markov1 year ago

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.

Alex 🇩🇰's profile picture
Alex 🇩🇰1 year ago

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

ras's profile picture
ras1 year ago

@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

Related Videos

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

88,502 views • 8 days ago

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 views • 1 year ago

This is next-level smart: An open-source platform that evaluates your prompts and automatically refines them based on the results. ​ Of course, it feels obvious after you see it: ​ • You write a prompt • The system evaluates it across different scenarios • Based on the results, it refines it to improve results ​ I recorded a quick video to show you how it works. It's pretty cool stuff! ​ Here are some of the problems and best practices for teams building AI applications: ​ 1. Testing your prompts manually doesn't scale 2. Prompts should not be spread throughout the codebase 3. Non-technical people need easy access to your prompts 4. Prompts can always use a version history to track changes 5. Monitoring the performance of prompts overtime is critical ​ Evaluating the prompts is what keeps me up at night from this list. Of all the conversations I've had with companies and people building AI applications, this is the area that's causing the most pain. ​ Testing a prompt is difficult. Think about how you'd test the response of a model subjectively. What do you account for, "tone," "objectivity," "completeness," "creativity," "readability," etc.? ​ Last week, I met the developers behind Latitude, an open-source prompt engineering platform trying to solve all of these issues. You can try the platform in two ways: ​ • You can self-host the platform. Free and open-source. • If you want to try their online product, their free tier is huge. ​ Here is the link: ​ Thanks to the Latitude team for collaborating with me on this post, and congratulations on going live with their product!

Santiago

64,157 views • 1 year ago

Demis Hassabis (Demis Hassabis) has had one of the most extraordinary careers in tech. He started as a chess prodigy and video game designer at 17 before getting a PhD in neuroscience and going on to found DeepMind. His lab cracked Go, solved protein structure prediction with AlphaFold, and then gave it away free to every scientist on earth. That work won him the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. Today he leads Google DeepMind, pushing toward the same goal he set as a teenager: AGI. On this special live episode of How to Build the Future, he sat down with YC's Garry Tan to talk about what still needs to happen to get us to AGI, his advice for founders on how to stay ahead of the curve, and what the next big scientific breakthroughs might be. 01:48 — What’s Missing Before We Get To AGI? 03:36 — Why Memory Is Still Unsolved 06:14 — How AlphaGo Shaped Gemini 08:06 — Why Smaller Models Are Getting So Powerful 10:46 — The 1000x Engineer 12:40 — Continual Learning and the Future of Agents 13:32 — Why AI Still Fails at Basic Reasoning 15:33 — Are Agents Overhyped or Just Getting Started? 18:31 — Can AI Become Truly Creative? 20:26 — Open Models, Gemma, and Local AI 22:26 — Why Gemini Was Built Multimodal 24:08 — What Happens When Inference Gets Cheap? 25:24 — From AlphaFold to the Virtual Cells 28:24 — AI as the Ultimate Tool for Science 30:43 — Advice for Founders 33:30 — The AlphaFold Breakthrough Pattern 35:20 — Can AI Make Real Scientific Discoveries? 37:59 — What to Build Before AGI Arrives

Y Combinator

358,228 views • 3 months ago