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

I'd rather read the prompt

claytonwramsey.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 880 posts

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#91

Post by crooked-v »

ineptech wrote: post #86

Relatedly, there was a major controversy at work recently over the propriety of adding something like this to a lengthy email discussion: > Since this is a long thread and we're including a wider audience, I thought I'd add Copilot's summary... Someone called them out for it, several others defended it. It was brought up in one team's retro and the opinions were divided and very contentious, ranging from, "the summar…

I think the attribution itself is a certain form of cowardice. If one is actually confident that a summary is correct they'd incorporate it directly. Leaving in the "Copilot says" is an implicit attempt to weasel out of taking responsibility for it.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#92

Post by candiddevmike »

mezyt wrote: post #39
mrweasel wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people do view obtaining a degree as just a hurdle to getting a decent job Then fail to actually learn anything and apply for jobs and try to cheat the interviewers using the same AI that helped them graduate. I fear that LLMs have already fostered the first batch of developers who cannot function without it. I don't even mind that you use an LLM for parts of your job, but you need to be able to function witho…

> I fear that LLMs have already fostered the first batch of developers who cannot function without it. Playing the contrarian here, but I'm from a batch of developers that can't function without a compiler, and I'm at 10% of what I can do without an IDE and static analysis.

Apples and oranges (or stochastic vs deterministic)

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#93

Post by agentbrown »

Some thoughts:

1. “When copying another person’s words, one doesn’t communicate their own original thoughts, but at least they are communicating a human’s thoughts. A language model, by construction, has no original thoughts of its own; publishing its output is a pointless exercise.”

LLMs, having being trained using the corpus of the web, I would argue communicate other human’s thoughts particularly well. Only in exercising an avoidance of plagiarism are the thoughts of other human’s evolved into something closer to “original thought” for the would-be plagarizer. But yes, at least a straight copy/paste retains the same rhetoric as the original human.

2. I’ve seen a few advertisements recently leverage “the prompt” as a means to resonate visual appeal.

i.e a new fast food delivery service starting their add with some upbeat music and a visual presentation of somebody typing into a LLM interface, “Where’s the best sushi around me?” And then cue the advertisement for the product they offer.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#94

Post by doright »

AstroBen wrote: post #71
Retr0id wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a decent cheater will quickly discover ways to conduce their LLM into producing text that is very difficult to detect Do you have any examples of this? I've never been able to get direct LLM output that didn't feel distinctly LLM-ish.

this immediately comes to mind https://regmedia.co.uk/2025/04/29/supplied_can_ai_change_you... A study on whether LLMs can influence people on r/changemymind

This only came to light after the study had already been running for a few months. That proves that we can no longer tell for certain unless it's literal GPT-speak the author was too lazy to edit themselves.

Teachers will lament the rise of AI-generated answers, but they will only ever complain about the blatantly obvious responses that are 100% copy-pasted. This is only an emerging phenomenon, and the next wave of prompters will learn from the mistakes of the past. From now on, unless you can proctor a room full of students writing their answers with nothing but pencil and paper, there will be no way to know for certain how much was AI and how much was original/rewritten.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#95

Post by necovek »

nathants wrote: post #32

the solution is obvious. stop grading the result, and start grading the process. if you can one-shot an answer to some problem, the problem is not interesting. the result is necessary, but not sufficient. how did you get there? how did you iterate? what were the twists and turns? what was the pacing? what was the vibe? no matter if with encyclopedia, google, or ai, the medium is the message. the medium is you interac…

Unfortunately, the video is a far cry from carrying all the representative information: there is no way you can capture your full emotions as you are working through a problem, and where did you get your "eureka" moments unless you are particularly good at verbalising your through process as you go through multiple dead-ends and recognize how they lead you in the right direction.

And reviewing video would be a nightmare.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#96

Post by jsheard »

ineptech wrote: post #86

Relatedly, there was a major controversy at work recently over the propriety of adding something like this to a lengthy email discussion: > Since this is a long thread and we're including a wider audience, I thought I'd add Copilot's summary... Someone called them out for it, several others defended it. It was brought up in one team's retro and the opinions were divided and very contentious, ranging from, "the summar…

I've noticed that even on here, which is generally extremely bullish on LLMs and AI in general, people get instantly downvoted into oblivion for LLM copypasta in comments. Nobody wants to read someone else's slop.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#98

Post by [deleted] »

Swizec wrote: post #79
afavour wrote: post #75

ChatGPT English is set to be the a ubiquitous, remarkably inefficient data transmission format that sits on top of email. I wish to communicate four points of information to you. I’ll ask ChatGPT to fluff those up into multiple paragraphs of text for me to email. You will receive that email, recognize its length and immediately copy and paste it into ChatGPT, asking it to summarize the points provided. Somewhere off…

Just send the damn bullet points! Everyone will thank you

[deleted]

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#99

Post by teekert »

afavour wrote: post #75

ChatGPT English is set to be the a ubiquitous, remarkably inefficient data transmission format that sits on top of email. I wish to communicate four points of information to you. I’ll ask ChatGPT to fluff those up into multiple paragraphs of text for me to email. You will receive that email, recognize its length and immediately copy and paste it into ChatGPT, asking it to summarize the points provided. Somewhere off…

Except I have never met anyone that likes fluffed up emails, nor considers them better in any way than your 4 points. Take that from a long-email writer (people beg me for a few bullets, somehow I always feel that it does not accurately convey my message, I am aware that this is a shortcoming) ;)

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#100

Post by philipwhiuk »

candiddevmike wrote: post #92
mezyt wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I fear that LLMs have already fostered the first batch of developers who cannot function without it. Playing the contrarian here, but I'm from a batch of developers that can't function without a compiler, and I'm at 10% of what I can do without an IDE and static analysis.

Apples and oranges (or stochastic vs deterministic)

Look inside a compiler, you'll find some AI.
Post reply on HN