Live data from Hacker News

Context engineering

chrisloy.dev

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: Context engineering

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is completely backwards. Engineers built steam engines first through trial and error and then eventually the laws of thermodynamics were invented to explain how steam engines work. Trial and error and fumbling around and creating rules of thumbs for systems you don’t entirely understand is the purest form of engineering.

I would argue it's more correct to call that phase experimentation. I doubt the early manufacturers of steam machines would even call themselves engineers in a serious or precise sense. They were engineers in the sense of "builder of engine" as a specific object, but the term's meaning has evolved from that basic initial usage. A discipline becomes engineering when we achieve a level of understanding. such that we ca…

I think it's still fair to call yourself an engineer while you're using a tool that might still be new. It doesn't change the principles of engineering just because you have a slightly different tool in your tool belt

You're right that we're still learning how to use them properly. If someone's purely sitting in front of an all-you-can-eat vibe coding machine and trying to one-shot themselves into a fortune with their next startup, then absolutely, they don't deserve to call themselves an engineer.

But just using AI as an assistive technology does not take away from your abilities as an engineer. Used properly, it can be a significant force multiplier

Re: Context engineering

#62
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

long shot, apropos of nothing, just recognized your name: If you are the cincinnatian poet Caleb Kaiser, we went to college together and I’d love to catch up. Email in profile. If you aren’t, disregard this. Sorry to derail the thread.

Hello friend!

Wow, this is incredible.

Re: Context engineering

#63
post #7

Are we still calling this things engineering?

There was a good series interviewing people that worked in both software engineering and traditional engineering: https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/are-we-really-engineers/. The conclusion was that yes, a lot of what we do as software engineers is engineering.

Re: Context engineering

#65
post #9

Why would I believe that any of this works? This is just some blokes idea of what people should do. There is no evidence offered. No attempt to measure the benefits.

Imagine the gall of someone who just goes on the internet and writes something.

Yeah - random baseless assertions are at the heart of progress.

Re: Context engineering

#66
post #9

Why would I believe that any of this works? This is just some blokes idea of what people should do. There is no evidence offered. No attempt to measure the benefits.

Most of the inference techniques (what the author calls context engineering design patterns) listed here originally came from the research community, and there are tons of benchmarks measuring their effectiveness, as well as a great deal of research behind what is happening mechanistically with each. As the author points out, many of the patterns are fundamentally about in-context learning, and this in particular has…

so why does the author not link to or reference this material so that other people can evaluate it?

Re: Context engineering

#68
post #5

I'd like a RSS feed of this blog..

It's available, https://buttondown.com/chrisloy/rss but it's not in sync with the blog, just a single 2024 entry found. :shrug:

That's just a feed for my extremely occasional newsletter, this is the blog one: https://chrisloy.dev/rss.xml

Re: Context engineering

#69
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the inference techniques (what the author calls context engineering design patterns) listed here originally came from the research community, and there are tons of benchmarks measuring their effectiveness, as well as a great deal of research behind what is happening mechanistically with each. As the author points out, many of the patterns are fundamentally about in-context learning, and this in particular has…

so why does the author not link to or reference this material so that other people can evaluate it?

[deleted]

Re: Context engineering

#70
The only thing that passed the test of time,so far is specificity: if you ask for multiple things or vague things, you receive half-baked answers trying to cover all bases. If you ask for specific one thing and describe it, the answer quality goes up;e.g. LLMs creating multi-part content mix up the parts and qualities of them, so e.g. asking for Part 1*specific, will always get a better answer than "list all parts of X"(quality drops with length of list).
Post reply on HN