This really does sound like Computer Science since it's very beginnings.
The only difference is that now it's a much more popular field, and not restricted to a few nerds sharing tips over e-mail or bbs.
This really does sound like Computer Science since it's very beginnings.
The only difference is that now it's a much more popular field, and not restricted to a few nerds sharing tips over e-mail or bbs.
Except in actual computer science you can prove that your strategies, discovered by trial and error, are actually good. Even though Dijkstra invented his eponymous algorithm by writing on a napkin, it's phrased in the language of mathematics and one can analyze quantitatively its effectiveness and trade-offs, and one can prove if it's optimal (as was done recently).
where the authors fail to explain how the prompts are obtained and how they prove that they are valid and not a hallucination.
Even more problematic is that too many "researchers" are just laymen, lacking a proper scientific background, and they are often just playing around with third-party-services, while delivering too much noise to the community.
So in general, AI has also something like the replication crisis in its own way. But on the other side, the latest wave of AI is just some years old (3 years now?), which is not much in real scientific progress-rates.
the move from "software engineering" to "AI engineering" is basically a switch from a hard science to a soft science.
rather than being chemists and physicists making very precise theory-driven predictions that are verified by experiment, we're sociologists and psychologists randomly changing variables and then doing a t-test afterward and asking "did that change anything?"
the hard sciences have theories. and soft sciences have models.
computer science is built on theory (turing machine/lambda calc/logic).
AI models are well "models" - we dont know why it works but it seems to - thats how models are.
Maybe it's true for computer science - but most people on here aren't doing computer science. They're doing software engineering. And it sure as heck isn't true for software engineering. If it were, I wouldn't be hearing arguments about programming languages for years, or static vs dynamic typing, or functional vs OOP...
So what you're arguing about AI isn't exactly anything new to software development.
Dijkstra is rolling in his grave. Computer Science was a rigorous sub-field of mathematics before the tech bros showed up and started moving fast and breaking things. The endless supply of VC money has destroyed this field.