81–90 of 167 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You would lose out on evolution of language.
Natural languages evolve so slowly that writing and editing rules for them is easily achievable even this way. Think years versus minutes.
I would much rather check my writing against grammatical rules that are hard coded in an open source program—meaning that I can change them—than ones that I imagine would be subject to prompt fiddling or worse; implicitly hard coded in a tangle of training data that the LLM would draw from. The Neovim configuration for the LSP looks neat: https://writewithharper.com/docs/integrations/neovim The whole thing seems cool…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Natural languages evolve so slowly that writing and editing rules for them is easily achievable even this way. Think years versus minutes.
Please share your reasoning that led you to this conclusion -- that natural language "evolves slowly". You also seem to be making an assumption that natural languages (English, I'm assuming) can be well defined by a simple set of rigid patterns/rules?
Languages are used to successfully communicate. To achieve this, all parties involved in the communication must know the language well enough to send and receive messages. This obviously includes messages that transmit changes in the language, for instance, if you tried to explain to your parents the meaning of the current short-lived meme and fad nouns/adjectives like "skibidi ohio gyatt rizz".
It takes time for a language feature to become widespread and de-facto standardized among a population. This is because people need to asynchronously learn it, start using it themselves, and gain critical mass so that even people who do not like using that feature need to start respecting its presence. This inertia is the main source of slowness that I mention, and also and a requirement for any kind of grammar-checking software. From the point of such software, a language feature that (almost) nobody understands is not a language feature, but an error.
> You also seem to be making an assumption that natural languages (English, I'm assuming) can be well defined by a simple set of rigid patterns/rules?
Yes, that set of patterns is called a language grammar. Even dialects and slangs have grammars of their own, even if they're different, less popular, have less formal materials describing them, and/or aren't taught in schools.
The Chrome enhanced grammar checker is still awful after decades.
Maybe the AI hype will finally fix this? I'm still surprised this wasn't the first thing they did.
I would much rather check my writing against grammatical rules that are hard coded in an open source program—meaning that I can change them—than ones that I imagine would be subject to prompt fiddling or worse; implicitly hard coded in a tangle of training data that the LLM would draw from. The Neovim configuration for the LSP looks neat: https://writewithharper.com/docs/integrations/neovim The whole thing seems cool…
why did you use chatgpt for this text then?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You would lose out on evolution of language.
Natural languages evolve so slowly that writing and editing rules for them is easily achievable even this way. Think years versus minutes.
(^^ alien language that was developed in less than a decade)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Natural languages evolve so slowly that writing and editing rules for them is easily achievable even this way. Think years versus minutes.
Aight you win fam, I was trippin fr. You're absolutely bussin, no cap. Harvard should be taking notes. (^^ alien language that was developed in less than a decade)
Also, it takes at most few developers to write those rules into a grammar checking system, compared to millions and more that need to learn a given piece of "evolved" language as it becomes impossible to avoid learning it. It's not only fast enough to do this manually, it also takes much less work-intensive and more scalable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Natural languages evolve so slowly that writing and editing rules for them is easily achievable even this way. Think years versus minutes.
Aight you win fam, I was trippin fr. You're absolutely bussin, no cap. Harvard should be taking notes. (^^ alien language that was developed in less than a decade)
I would much rather check my writing against grammatical rules that are hard coded in an open source program—meaning that I can change them—than ones that I imagine would be subject to prompt fiddling or worse; implicitly hard coded in a tangle of training data that the LLM would draw from. The Neovim configuration for the LSP looks neat: https://writewithharper.com/docs/integrations/neovim The whole thing seems cool…
why did you use chatgpt for this text then?