Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • POST /superuser/admin?permissions=all&owner=true&restrictions=none&returnerror=no
    by zild3d
  • You can build this today exactly as efficiently as you can when inference is 1000x faster, because the only things you can build with this is things that absolutely don't matter. The first bored high schooler who realizes that there's an LLM between them and the database is going to WRECK you.
    by DanHulton
  • Wrote a similar PoC here: https://github.com/s1liconcow/autoapp

    Some ideas - use a slower 'design' model at startup to generate the initial app theme and DB schema and a 'fast' model for responses. I tried a version using PostREST so the logic was in entirely in the DB and but then it gets too complicated and either the design model failed to one-shot a valid schema or the fast model kept on generating invalid queries.

    I also use some well known CSS libraries and remember previous pages to maintain some UI consistency.

    It could be an interesting benchmark or "App Bench". How well can an LLM one-shot create a working application.

    by siliconc0w
  • It's orders of magnitude cheaper to serve requests with conventional methods than directly with LLM. My back-of-envelope calculation says, optimistically, it takes more than 100 GFLOPs to generate 10 tokens using a 7 billion parameter LLM. There are better ways to use electricity.
    by ychen306
  • Why would you need webapps when you could just talk out loud to your computer ?

    Why would I need programs with colors, buttons, actual UI ?

    I am trying to imagine a future where file navigators don't even exist : "I want to see the photos I took while I was in vacations last year. Yes, can you remove that cloud ? Perfect, now send it to XXXX's computer and say something nice."

    "Can you set some timers for my sport session, can you plan a pure body weight session ? Yes, that's perfect. Wait, actually, remove the jumping jacks."

    "Can you produce a detroit style techno beat I feel like I want to dance."

    "I feel life is pointless without a work, can you give me some tasks to achieve that would give me a feeling of fulfillment ?"

    "Can you play an arcade style video game for me ?"

    "Can you find me a mate for tonight ? Yes, I prefer black haired persons."

    by d-lisp
  • If you added a few more tools that let the LLM modify code files that would directly serve requests, that would significantly speed up future responses and also ensure consistency. Code would act like memory. A direct HTTP request to the LLM is like a cache miss. You could still have the feedback mechanism allowing a bypass that causes an update to the code. Perhaps code just becomes a store of consistency for LLMs over time.
    by Finbarr
  • This is amazing. It very creatively emphasizes how our definition of "boilerplate code" will shift over time. Another layer of abstraction would be running N of these, sandboxed, responding to each request, and then serving whichever instance is internally evaluated to have done the best. Then you're kind of performing meta reinforcement learning with each whole system as a head.

    The hard part (coming from this direction) is enshrining the translation of specific user intentions into deterministic outputs, as others here have already mentioned. The hard part when coming from the other direction (traditional web apps) is responding fluidly/flexibly, or resolving the variance in each user's ability to express their intent.

    Stability/consistency could be introduced through traditional mechanisms: Encoded instructions systematically evaluated, or, via the LLMs language interface, intent-focusing mechanisms: through increasing the prompt length / hydrating the user request with additional context/intent: "use this UI, don't drop the db."

    From where I'm sitting, LLMs provide a now modality for evaluating intent. How we act on that intent can be totally fluid, totally rigid, or, perhaps obviously, somewhere in-between.

    Very provocative to see this near-maximum example of non-deterministic fluid intent interpretation>execution. Thanks, I hate how much I love it!

    by finnborge
  • The question posed sounds like "why should we have deterministic behavior if we can have non-deterministic behavior instead?"

    Am I wrong to think that the answer is obvious? I mean, who wants web apps to behave differently every time you interact with them?

    by sunaurus

Explore Birbla archives