Domain and AI Engineering on Slides EP (2023/10/23)
The development and blogging of the Slides EP was large, so this blog presents other notes related to the project.
Slides EP
I exhaustively blogged the development of the Slides EP at Building Slides from Screenshots App in JavaFX with an associated JavaFX application that implements a master-view-detail GUI with ORC assistance to create presentations from screenshots and code snippets. The app includes complex and exciting features along its development.
Domain Engineering
These general-purpose software out there cannot be composed.
Even if they have (bloated) AI assistance, macros, or even APIs (if at all), they’re just products for profit. Photoshop can paint an image, but it’ll never understand source code or your specific system. M$ Word or LaTeX will never understand what an equation means, as in mathematics, etc.
They need bloated features like AI that take huge deep learning models to develop and train and have heavy licensing and marketing because they’re general purpose. For instance, products that suck need capitalism (marketing) to sell them, but they’re not the solution to the problems.
If you’re a domain expert, you simplify matters to the specific domain, and the more you simplify, the less bloated AI, marketing, analytics and engineering you have because you address the problems instead of the symptoms.
AI can have its place to automate external systems which I wanted to leave clear in this development, but it’ll never replace the underlying domain as they’re independent tools.
That is, you need to understand how AI should be useful to automate works for our domain language instead of buying mundane general-purpose software that uses AI as magic. Notice the difference between automation and magic.
For example, grammar checkers are not technical, so you get a lot of errors
marked because they don’t understand computer and math languages and idioms.
They only want you to pay a subscription to fix all the “issues” you have
they sell you. Their dream is to remove all the “issues 💸,” so your original
tone even changes, and ends up sounding like a robotic agent or someone else.
They won’t even tell you the real enhancements of your technical text you should be fixing. They’re not engineering grade. They tell you to remove something for “clarity issues,” then it tells you to add it back again 🤯 for correctness.
In the end, you have to be proficient in English (i.e., the domain) to know what you’re doing because any “magic” tool was made just for the sake of a profit agenda, thus bloated under the hood. You have to compose your tools instead of paying for generic ones that turn into workarounds and will never return most of the investment.
Another clear example is ChatGPT, which can generate mundane Python or any popular mainstream language or framework code but struggles with ultra-niche technologies like Purescript or even JavaFX. It makes up unexisting APIs and code that wouldn’t compile. These unpopular techs require domain expertise, and there will be (hopefully) never enough data to train or fine-tune those ultra-bloated magic-based (and unethical with IP legal issues) models with technology that requires actual engineering.
In the end, you must be proficient in your domain and realize that tools like ChatGPT are nothing but a faster way to automate what you otherwise have to search in Google results.
General-purpose software is useful but not engineering-grade. On the other hand, mathematical software must be engineering-grade by nature.
You should refrain from saying, “It was generated by AI” when, in fact, the
reality of how AI should work comes to “It was automated by AI.” The exception
would be only when the whole tool (as a final product) is named after AI, e.g.,
“AI generated image.”
There are likely possible ways to make AI work for our domain language (as said above).
I figured out one simple way to leverage an AI application for this project, so it serves as a good example.
Developing anything domain-specific here is natural but not the objective, though. Thus, the purpose is to blog a new example project to start taking action, devising standards, and proving concepts.
Recall the domain engineering automation concepts of what this comes about even though my purpose this time is to develop these ideas conservatively in Java as an example project.
Domain Composition Versus Magic
It struck me as funny (after writing Domain Engineering) when I read “Adobe Photoshop API magic, now available in the cloud” 😂 on the Photoshop developer page. It tells you to remove background via API, but you actually need composition, like in FP. You should “compose backgrounds” instead of removing them from a binary image. That contrasts a simple solution for the former versus a complicated one for the latter.
Although you can compose layers in Photoshop or certain functionalities in general-purpose software, you just can’t take some 10% of the monolith and pay 10% of the price to actually compose it with a totally different domain like math or programming. As said before, it won’t return most of the investment since general-purpose software is not composable.
Hence, as math software engineers, we must compromise to build composable software to remove both needs for “magic” and for duplicating expensive-to-engineer features.
OCR Side Effects
It can be daunting to try to make ML models work. From my job experiences, we’ve had to use several OCR providers as fallbacks. They all suck, but some suck less for the underlying problem, so we might as well make that one the “primary provider 💸.”
One of the shoe stones you’ll find is when the image quality is low or bad, and you can’t make your users buy an iPhone 15 Pro MAX ULTRA and employ basic skills to shoot a photo 😣.
Solutions you find out there are generic, and if you try to make them work for you by fine-tuning, they will just become the same over-engineered OOP inheritance garbage based on product type classes that were popular in the Java times, the same way “AI” is hyped today.
AI should be a Bridge in your System Boundary
Notice AI can be a bridge between the general-purpose input and the domain-specific one, but the underlying domain will always exist.
I mentioned this because many idiots believe the marketing idea that “AI is everything” (same for other marketing-hyped concepts like capitalism or OOP), while in fact, everything is rooted in complex (usually “boring”) math, domain, and engineering facts, so AI (capitalism, OOP, etc.) is just one small part of a system, it’s just one more tool.
Applying AI to Automate your Domain
There are two ways to see AI, as “magic” or automation. As an engineer, you must ensure you understand how to apply AI correctly since it is a heavy technology with huge responsibilities. Applying AI correctly means it will be a mean to automate your domain rather than using it as the “magic” that marketers, general-purpose providers or practitioners will tell you.
There is a terrible misconception out there that anything hyped or trendy becomes “the whole thing.” For example, they believe that every random product after the ChatGPT hype is an “AI.” Any competent engineer must understand that the AI stereotype (or “the current thing”) is not supposed to do the job for you. It becomes like the CEO or PhD who steals the credits because of their political status.
Implementing complex features involving AI is expensive, and the Slides EP does a good job, but it still leaves areas to optimize. Even though, it does provide the design and documentation to solve the primary parts of the system.
The way I applied ORC AI in the Slides EP shows a clear insight on how to apply AI properly, since it automates the slides when you only have raw inputs like screenshots by converting it into domain concepts. Conversely, if your user input is already efficient, like source code instead of screenshots, using AI is unnecessary, it is all about composition, a balanced system design, and optimizing for your domain.