> I consider my prompts and prompting style to be trade secrets.

No one wrote this with a straight face did they?

Yes? If I've developed a prompting style over the past four years that produces efficient and secure code bases with novel features, I consistently out-perform my colleagues using the same tools, and it is how I make money, then I don't see how it is not a trade secret.

▲

kingkongjaffa 21 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Talking to customers is the most important thing, not sure prompting really matters at all, LLMs lack true novel creativity and cannot prioritize product features based on direct customer value.

▲

bigstrat2003 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You haven't. This shit ain't rocket surgery, dude.

	▲	jesse_dot_id 16 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Have you ever seen really good technical writing versus really shitty technical writing? Which do you prefer? Why? The LLM is reading instructions. The quality and design of the instructions you give to it matters deeply. If you don't think so, I don't particularly care, but you can't really approach a LLM like an easy button. It's like a graphing calculator. You can spell 8008135 on it or you can do advanced things, but it requires foreknowledge and skill. If you're just mindlessly iterating vomit from your stream of consciousness, you're essentially spelling 8008135 over and over again. That feels novel now. It's not going to remain novel and you will stagnate as things progress. Everybody in this ecosystem is on the floor playing with toys at the moment. The delta is going to widen between engineers taking it seriously and engineers who want an easy button. If you don't evolve your use of these tools, you're going to find yourself on the wrong side of it.