"Until prompt-to-binary is reliable enough that nobody reads the intermediate code, the analogy doesn't hold."
1. OK, let's create 100 instances of prompt under the hood, 1-2 will hallucinate, 3-5 will produce something different from 90% of remaining, and it can
compile based on 90% of answers
2. computer memory is also not 100% reliable , but we live with it somehow without man-in-the-middle manually check layer?
1. OK, let's create 100 instances of prompt under the hood, 1-2 will hallucinate, 3-5 will produce something different from 90% of remaining, and it can compile based on 90% of answers
2. computer memory is also not 100% reliable , but we live with it somehow without man-in-the-middle manually check layer?