On: Custom instructions for ChatGPT

[jsight]

I've heard people describe "prompt engineering" as just people who know how to craft prompts well.

I hope we converge on a better definition than that soon. Maybe the name can change too.

[__loam → jsight]

I think the people who know what they're doing are probably going to come up with some quantitative ways to evaluate the performance of prompts. That's where the real engineering will come from. You could even have chatGPT generate prompts for you and evaluate the best performing ones.

Any moron can make up a prompt and say "yeah looks good enough".

[jstarfish → jsight]

It's just social engineering, codified. Even in that context it feels cheap.

Lawyers do the same thing as "prompt engineers"-- command mastery of English to achieve a desired outcome. We don't call them Litigation Engineers.

[gorlilla → jstarfish]

We call them Wordsmiths.

[calny → gorlilla]

I’ll take it. I spend about half my time developing/promptsmithing and the other half lawyering. “Wordsmith” sure beats some of the other lawyer epithets out there

[alewi481 → gorlilla]

So prompt engineers could be promptsmiths?

[vunderba → jsight]

I think prompt craft is a better definition. Engineering implies that there is a quantifiable aspect, and by their very nature LLMs are somewhat inscrutable black boxes, so craft feels more appropriate.

[nefarious_ends → jsight]

prompt-fu, like Google-fu? I have a friend who’s gotten very good at prompt-fu.

[SlackingOff123 → nefarious_ends]

I think that's a bit of a mouthful for casual use. I like "prompting" as an equivalent to "googling", although it is a bit more dependent on context.

[Veen → jsight]

It's really a form of rhetoric tailored for LLMs.

> Rhetoric aims to study the techniques writers or speakers utilize to inform, persuade, or motivate particular audiences in specific situations

[sagarpatil → jsight]

LLM whisperers?