>>new ways to create specifications.

Thats again programming languages. Real issue with LLMs now is it doesn't matter if it can generate code quickly. Some one still has to read, verify and test it.

Perhaps we need a need a terse programming language. Which can be read quickly and verified. You could call that specification.

Yes, essentially a higher level programming language than what we currently have. A programming language that doesn't have strict syntax, and can be expressed with words or code. And like any other programming language, it includes specifications for the tests and expectations of the result.

The programming language can look more like code in parts where the specification needs to be very detailed. I think people can get intuition about where the LLM is unlikely to be successful. It can have low detail for boilerplate or code that is simple to describe.

You should be able to alter and recompile the specification, unlike the wandering prompt which makes changes faster than normal version control practices keep up with.

Perhaps there's a world where reading the specification rather than the compiled code is sufficient in order to keep cognitive load at reasonable levels.

At very least, you can read compiled code until you can establish your own validation set and create statistical expectations about your domain. Principally, these models will always be statistical in nature. So we probably need to start operating more inside that kind of framework if we really want to be professional about it.