So far I'm yet to see anything like it, but I see in commercial products everywhere that they have full domain over this new type of code.
This is to create a catalogue for pen.el. One thing we have just introduced
is a field to specify a licence for each prompt. However, I must say
that prompts are more like functions. *Soft prompts* are very granular
prompts as they have been reduced to a minimal number of characters using optimisation.
that this is a new type of function definition and a new type of programming is emerging.
A prompt function is a function defined by a
version of a Language Model (LM) and a prompt (input), but
Here is a new corporation which is creating a prompt engineering environment.
However, they do not have their own operating system to integrate prompting into. That's why emacs is years ahead, potentially.
A prompt is merely a function with a language model as a parameter. Without integration, it's quite useless.
I think a prompts database -- something like
Datomic or other RDF-like, immutable storage
must be added into GNU organisation to store
selected prompts and generations, and a GPL or EleutherAI GPT model
is ultimately integrated into core emacs via
some low level syntax through partnership with EleutherAI.
I would expect in the future to download emacs
along with an open- source GPT model, and be
able to create prompt functions as easily as
A 1:1 prompt:function database of sorts is a
good starting point in my opinion, but
remembering the generations is also important.
But the scale is immense. This is why a p2p
database that can remember immutably is
important, in my opinion. If this seems too
grand of scale, then at the very least
consider a GNU prompts repository.
> Sounds like a replacement for a programmer's mind.
Yes it is. It trivialises the implementation and requires that programmers now be more imaginative, and will be supported by the language model.
Rather than writing an implementation, function is defined by the
input types and a Language Model and version of the language model.
> Where is definition of the abbreviation NLP?
NLP stands for Natural Language Processing. Until recently, code was not considered part of that domain, but the truth is NLP algorithms are extremely useful for code generation, code search and code understanding.
> What is definition of the abbreviation LM?
LM stands for Language Model. It is a statistical model of language, rather than use formal grammars. Emacs lisp functions and macros do not have a syntax for stochastic/probabilistic programming.
Good, but is there a video to show what it really does?
Here is an online catalogue of GPT tools. Pen.el is among the developer tools.https://gpt3demo.com/category/developer-tools
=Pen.el= and emacs has the potential to do all the things for all of
the products in =gpt3demo.com
> I would like to demonstrate Pen.el with this particular video which I have created to demonstrate a new type of programming -- collaborative within a language model.https://mullikine.github.io/posts/caching-and-saving-results-of-prompt-functions-in-pen-el/https://asciinema.org/a/MhOU0eMnJsRpXf2Ak9YStPlz8
> Do you mean "exemplary" or "examplary", is it spelling mistake?
I am building a DSL for encoding prompt design
patterns to generate prompt functions for
> Pen.el creates functions 1:1 for a prompt to an emacs lisp function.
What this means is that a prompt may be
parameterized to define a relation (i.e.
function) and therefore code and I have chosen
to create one parameterized function per prompt.
The prompt text once associated to a LM
becomes a type of query (i.e. code), so
prompts should not be discounted as being any
less than such, and qualify for the GPL3 license.
> I understand that it is kind of fetching information, but that does not solve licensing issues, it sounds like licensing hell.
This is exactly why a GPL LM or compatible LM
is absolutely crucial and needs to be
integrated, otherwise all imaginary code will
be violating and harvesting open source for
the foreseeable future as there is no