this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2023
67 points (95.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43856 readers
1797 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Both are fascinating to me. I have also met a lot of people who are interested in both. I don't think it's a coincidence. There's something really interesting about the way we can use symbols and signifiers to encode and transmit and preserve information. Any kind of information.
Coding requires you to say precisely what you mean. Give clear instructions. Define exactly the pieces you are working with. There is really no room for ambiguity, and there's something really satisfying to the logical side of my brain about that kind of rigidity.
But that's exactly why linguistics is interesting to the other side of my brain. Human language is full of fuzzy categories, changing definitions, unwritten rules, unspoken connotations, creative repurposing, borrowing, taboos... You can add dimensions of meaning with text, your voice, your eyes, the movement of your body. You can pack so much nuance into a single word or phrase; a subtle hint can mean so much more than what you are literally saying. You can intentionally encode a message so that it is NOT understood. There is infinite malleability in human language.
This is why it's so exciting to see such progress in natural language processing. Large language models kind of blur the lines and begin to "understand" and respond to the ambiguities of the way we use language (at least in a kind of probabilistic sense). But they are also learning our programming languages. Right now, we can converse with AI models that can write (basic) code for us and with us, and make changes based on our conversational language. Imagine one day programming in plain language without that intermediary step!