Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

d3.harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 282 posts

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#51

Post by foooorsyth »

dopylitty wrote: post #22
mgaunard wrote: post #2

Says more about how useless BCG consultants are.

I’m starting to think there’s an LLM equivalent to the old saying about how everything the media writes is accurate except on the topics you’re an expert in. All LLM output looks to be good quality except when it’s output you’re an expert in. People who have no background in writing or editing think LLMs will revolutionize those fields. Actual writers and editors take one look at LLM output and can see it’s basically…

Yep. ChatGPT is like having a junior engineer confidently asking to merge broken garbage into your codebase all the time. Adds negative value for anyone that knows what they’re doing.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#52

Post by jprete »

skybrian wrote: post #39
dopylitty wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m starting to think there’s an LLM equivalent to the old saying about how everything the media writes is accurate except on the topics you’re an expert in. All LLM output looks to be good quality except when it’s output you’re an expert in. People who have no background in writing or editing think LLMs will revolutionize those fields. Actual writers and editors take one look at LLM output and can see it’s basically…

Programmers don't think that, though, or least not all the time. You could say similar things about Stack Overflow, and yet we use it.

Stack Overflow responses are well known to be misranked. I’ve heard a rule of thumb that the actual correct answer is typically about #3.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#53

Post by mawadev »

brabel wrote: post #16
_pferreir_ wrote: post #4

Maybe this tells more about BCG consultants than its does about GPT-4?

That's what you would like to think, isn't it? I'm afraid this would be just as much true with any other kind of subjects, and as far as I know, there's no evidence either way so this is just a cheap stab you're having at them.

After all the cheap stabs I had to take as a programmer... I allow myself to experience schadenfreude, even if there is no evidence...

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#54

Post by cube00 »

vorticalbox wrote: post #3
mgaunard wrote: post #2

Says more about how useless BCG consultants are.

Somewhat agree, I know LLM have boosted my programming output mostly in writing jsdocs and pr descriptions. The things I don't really like doing

If your docs and PR descriptions can be generated off file diffs everyone's time could be better spent scanning the diff to come to the same conclusions.

Consider using your PRs and docs to capture the answers to the usual why questions which LLM won't be able to do.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#55

Post by jprete »

wqtz wrote: post #28
mgaunard wrote: post #2

Says more about how useless BCG consultants are.

Most management consultants are useless. But there are some realities you must accept. Number 1. In a team of 20-30 engineers there is only one extremely god "why is he with us" engineers who is great at technical stuff and being a people person. However, no matter how nice he is his approach to his job, it is a job and I will only drop hints how the management should be done. He doesn't care about where the company…

Needs an /s.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#56

Post by hutzlibu »

dopylitty wrote: post #22
mgaunard wrote: post #2

Says more about how useless BCG consultants are.

I’m starting to think there’s an LLM equivalent to the old saying about how everything the media writes is accurate except on the topics you’re an expert in. All LLM output looks to be good quality except when it’s output you’re an expert in. People who have no background in writing or editing think LLMs will revolutionize those fields. Actual writers and editors take one look at LLM output and can see it’s basically…

LLMs are not worthless for programming. You just cannot expect it to ship a full programm for you, but for generating functions with limited scope, I found it very useful. How to make use of a new and common libary for example. But of course you have to check and test.

And for text I know people who use it succesfully (professionally) to generate texts for them as a summary from some data. They still have to proof read, but it saves them time, so it is valuable.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#57

Post by niels_bom »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #26
jakey_bakey wrote: post #17

> Two distinct patterns of AI use emerged: “Centaurs,” who divided and delegated tasks between themselves and the AI, and “Cyborgs,” who integrated their workflow with the AI. It was nice of them to explain that the article was total horse dung before having to read the whole paper

The article certainly didn't invent the term 'Centaur', but I haven't seen cyborg used in that way. It does seem a bit clickbaity.

I like Cory Doctorow’s use in “Chickenized Reverse Centaur”.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#58

Post by jprete »

famouswaffles wrote: post #27
mgaunard wrote: post #2

Says more about how useless BCG consultants are.

Says more about how people will parrot the same phrase over and over for anything at all. It's just funny how you can predict a comment like this in every thread regardless of what it does. "It says more about [insert]" anytime GPT does something just makes the phrase lose all meaning. Surely you have something meaningful to say?

Often effortposts aren’t worth it because someone will come along and Gish Gallop the post with opaquely nonsensical bad-faith counterarguments that are a lot of work to refute.

I agree with you in an ideal world, but sadly this isn’t one.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#59

Post by t8sr »

wqtz wrote: post #28
mgaunard wrote: post #2

Says more about how useless BCG consultants are.

Most management consultants are useless. But there are some realities you must accept. Number 1. In a team of 20-30 engineers there is only one extremely god "why is he with us" engineers who is great at technical stuff and being a people person. However, no matter how nice he is his approach to his job, it is a job and I will only drop hints how the management should be done. He doesn't care about where the company…

Man, write drunk, but edit sober.

Re: ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

#60

Post by dharmab »

foooorsyth wrote: post #51
dopylitty wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m starting to think there’s an LLM equivalent to the old saying about how everything the media writes is accurate except on the topics you’re an expert in. All LLM output looks to be good quality except when it’s output you’re an expert in. People who have no background in writing or editing think LLMs will revolutionize those fields. Actual writers and editors take one look at LLM output and can see it’s basically…

Yep. ChatGPT is like having a junior engineer confidently asking to merge broken garbage into your codebase all the time. Adds negative value for anyone that knows what they’re doing.

hahahah. A friend of mine has a problem with a contractor at his workplace that tries to PR in shell scripts written with Copilot. My friend spends an hour to explain why a script generated in 5 minutes is horrifically awful and will likely take down the company. He's legitimately angry about it.
Post reply on HN