141–150 of 275 posts
That, would give the responder the chance to modify the prompt and get a perhaps better answer from the LLM?
I’ve encountered an even more nightmarish version of this recently: ai generated tickets. Basically dumping the output of “write a detailed product spec for a clinical trial data collection pipeline” into a jira ticket and handing it off. Doesn’t match any of our internal product design, adds tons of extraneous features. When I brought this up with said PM they basically responded that these inaccuracies should just…
I’ve encountered an even more nightmarish version of this recently: ai generated tickets. Basically dumping the output of “write a detailed product spec for a clinical trial data collection pipeline” into a jira ticket and handing it off. Doesn’t match any of our internal product design, adds tons of extraneous features. When I brought this up with said PM they basically responded that these inaccuracies should just…
Cue a similar joke about salary negotiation, and the annual dance around goals and performance indicators. Is it really programmers who should be afraid to become redundant, when you think about it?
I should know better than making jokes about reality. It has already one-upped me too many times.
I’ve encountered an even more nightmarish version of this recently: ai generated tickets. Basically dumping the output of “write a detailed product spec for a clinical trial data collection pipeline” into a jira ticket and handing it off. Doesn’t match any of our internal product design, adds tons of extraneous features. When I brought this up with said PM they basically responded that these inaccuracies should just…
This. In my case I do write from time to time tickets with an LLM but it's always after a long exploratory session with Claude Code, when I go back and forth checking possibilities and gathering data, and then I tell it to create a ticket with the info gathered so far. But even in that case I tend to edit it because I don't like the style or add some useless data that I want to remove.
Shouldn't the etiquette be that if you send someone a response from AI, you start your message by telling the prompt that produced that reponse? That, would give the responder the chance to modify the prompt and get a perhaps better answer from the LLM?
That results in a shorter and more concise message, and the original sender can choose to use the prompt you provided on their favourite LLM from the start.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find your comment disingenuous at best. > The internet was not a bastion of high quality content or discourse pre-AI. I have read thousands upon thousands of pages of AI-related discourse, watched hundreds of videos since 2022, maybe even a thousand now on it. NEVER at any point in time did people opine for the "high quality" internet of before. They opined for the imperfect HUMAN internet of before. We are now see…
Even before AI, the human social internet was loaded with bots and disingenuous actors. You want the imperfect human internet that is also pristine and curated. I've been socializing on the internet since 1994, and I feel fairly confident in sharing that this never existed, except in nostalgia. If that's what you're pining for, you're going to have to find a highly protected part of the internet that is walled off fr…
As a senior engineer, I am getting extremely tired of reviewing AI slops. Today at work I have decided that I just have to build a POC project from scratch. I spent 2 weeks to review the code, to log the process, and to build toy examples to make my argument clear that some (actually most) parts were not working. The funny thing is that I know my manager got this “working” within a week with Claude. I had to spend 2…
Shouldn't the etiquette be that if you send someone a response from AI, you start your message by telling the prompt that produced that reponse? That, would give the responder the chance to modify the prompt and get a perhaps better answer from the LLM?
Even better, reply only with the prompt that you would have used, not the resulting text. Don't even run the prompt through an LLM. That results in a shorter and more concise message, and the original sender can choose to use the prompt you provided on their favourite LLM from the start.
AI, and different AIs, give different answers to the same question, so it may be useful if you can provide a good summary of the different responses you got.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. In my case I do write from time to time tickets with an LLM but it's always after a long exploratory session with Claude Code, when I go back and forth checking possibilities and gathering data, and then I tell it to create a ticket with the info gathered so far. But even in that case I tend to edit it because I don't like the style or add some useless data that I want to remove.
It sounds like you'd save a lot of time if you just didn't use the LLM.