151–160 of 257 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s the conversational equivalent of “Let me google that for you”.
It's the conversational equivalent of an amplification attack
It's deeply sad to me that I will never again be able to read a message from someone and know, for sure, that it was written by them themselves.
I'm guessing that you've never actually lived in that world... When I got squggily written cursive letters from my grandma I could be pretty sure those were her words though up by herself, for the effort to accurately reproduce the consistent mess she made would have been great. But the moment we moved to the typewriter and then other digital means uniformly printed out on paper or screens you've really just assumed…
Sending half-baked, run-on, unvetted writing, when you easily could have chosen otherwise, is in fact the disrespectful choice.
I couldn't disagree more. Its like someone going to Wikipedia to helpfully copy and paste a summary of an issue. Fast and with a good enough level of accuracy. Generally the AI summaries I see are more topical and accurate than the many other comments in the thread.
Really!? [0] https://i.imgur.com/ly5yk9h.png
In general it raises the mean accuracy and info of a given thread.
Its like self driving cars.
> "I vibe-coded this pull request in just 15 minutes. Please review" > > Well, why don't you review it first? My current day to day problem is that, the PRs don't come with that disclaimer; The authors won't even admit if asked directly. Yet I know my comments on the PR will be fed to the cursor so it makes more crappy edits, and I'll be expecting an entirely different PR in 10 minutes to review from scratch without…
I haven't personally been in this position, but when I think about it, looping all your reviews through the cursor would reduce your perceived competence, wouldn't it? Is giving them a negative performance review an option?
I think it all goes to crap when there is some economic incentive: e.g. blogspam that is profitable thanks to ads and anyone that stumbles upon it, alongside being able to generate large amounts of coherent sounding crap quickly.
I have seen quite a few sites like that in the first pages of both Google and DuckDuckGo which feels almost offensive. At the same time, posts that promise something and then don't go through with it are similarly bad, regardless of AI generated or not.
For example, recently I needed to look up how vLLM compares with Ollama (yes, for running the very same abominable intelligence models, albeit for more subjectively useful reasons) because Qwen3-30B-A3B and Devstral-24B both run pretty badly on Nvidia L4 cards with Ollama, which feels disappointing given their price tags and relatively small sizes of those models.
Yet pretty much all of the comparisons I found just regurgitated high level overviews of the technologies, like 5-10 sites that felt almost identical and could have been copy pasted from one another. Not a single one of those had a table of various models and their tokens/s on a given bit of hardware, for both Ollama and vLLM.
Back in the day when nerds got passionate about Apache2 vs Nginx, you'd see comparisons with stats and graphs and even though I wouldn't take all of those at face value (since with Apache2 you should turn off .htaccess and also tweak the MPM settings for more reasonable performance), at least there would sometimes be a Git repo.
I don't care what chatgpt or deepseek thinks about the proposal. I care what _you_ think about it - that's why I'm sending it to you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LinkedIn is probably the worst culprit. It has always been a wasteland of “corporate/professional slop”, except now the interface deliberately suggests AI-generated responses to posts. I genuinely cannot think of a worse “social network” than that hell hole. “Very insightful! Truly a masterclass in turning everyday professional rituals into transformative personal branding opportunities. Your ability to synergize aut…
> now the interface deliberately suggests AI-generated responses to posts This feature absolutely defies belief. If I ran a social network (thank god I don't) one of my main worries would be a flood of AI skip driving away all the human users. And LinkedIn are encouraging it. How does that happen? My best guess is that it drives up engagement numbers to allow some disinterested middle managers to hit some internal ta…
It gets interesting once you start a discussion about a topic with someone who had ChatGPT doing all the work. They often do not have the same in-depth understanding of what is written there vs. someone who wrote it themselves. Which may not come as a surprise, but yet - here we are. It‘s these kind of discussions I find exhausting, because they show no honesty and no interest by the person I'm interacting with. I us…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it too much to ask them to learn? People can have poor communication habits and still write* a thoughtful email.
Maybe yes, it's too much? I'm a non-native English speaker who writes many work emails in English. My English is quite good, but still, it takes me longer to write email in English because it's not as natural. Sometimes I spend a few minutes wondering if I'm getting the tone right or maybe being too pushy, if I should add some formality or it would sound forced, etc., while in my native language these things are auto…
I really wish some of my coworkers would stop using LLMs to write me emails or even Teams messages. It does feel extremely rude, to the point I don't even want to read them anymore.
Didn't our parents go through the same thing when email came out? My dad used to say: "Stop sending me emails. It's not the same." I'd tell him, "It's better. "No, it's not. People used to sit down and take the time to write a letter, in their own handwriting. Every letter had its own personality, even its own smell. And you had to walk to the post office to send it. Now sending a letter means nothing." Change is ine…