[flagged]
The user is visibly frustrated
191–200 of 288 posts
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Even if you communicate perfectly, there's no guarantee that the LLM will "behave as instructed" and as you imagined it to. Indeed, the frustration often comes from the fact that you've said something as clear as day, yet the agent takes another path. People forget. People misunderstand clear things. Teach yourself to not judge people for being human. You'll have easier time with AI. You are not gonna be angry at 5…
> Teach yourself to not judge people for being human. You'll have easier time with AI. LLM is not a human. This implication that OP or someone else is impatient against people when they get frustrated with effin machine is completely absurd. > AI is a 5 year old that accidentally ate all the encyclopedias in the world and is super eager to help LLM is not 5 years old kid. It is an expensive tool.
LLM literally is neither 5 year old kid, nor a machine. It's just a large math equation that was tuned to produce outputs similar to what humans produce.
If you choose to think about LLM as a machine you are biased. You expect from it things you'd expect from a machine. Reliability, repeatability, utility, indifference, etc. You pass your past frustrations with other machines onto LLMs.
If you choose to think about LLM as well read 5 year old you are also biased to expect from it different things. You don't have the same frustrations. You have different behaviors towards it. Behaviors that accidentally are more conducive to drawing value from the tool that is LLM.
We perceive the world through metaphors. If you pick wrong (counterproductive) metaphors you end up being constantly upset by something that's just a math result. By no ones fault but your own.
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#193> Yet, lately I often find myself mildly displeased, furiously hammering on my laptop “WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU DO???”. The recipient of these tirades is, you might have guessed, a coding agent. It’s completely pointless, I know. Coding agents are just probabilistic machines generating patches.
I wonder if using ALL CAPS and profanity can be used to steer the LLM to give more weight (in the maths sense) to a certain part of its predictions, e.g. make it not brush something aside or overlook it as much. I mean, obviously it won't get upset and if it's trained on human generated stuff in addition to synthetic stuff, then some of that natural language would be a good signal of needing to reconsider the course.
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#194Skill Issue.
AIs are juniors, and as much as we love the trope that "humans eventually learn" in my experience most do not. The thing about an LLM is that I haven't had to contend with an LLM's ego, which was fairly often dealing with juniors.
You gotta set the juniors up for success in the same way I have to set my toddlers up for a successful breakfast. If I leave the syrup on the table and walk away they're going to manage to get it on the ceiling.
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#195My take on the issue is that for most use cases where AI is pushed to the general public, a conversational chatbot is not the right tool, and the experience is bound to be frustrating. Remember when Copilot was basically a super-smart version of Intellisense? It was awesome. Sure, there was a lot of pushback and concern, mainly about licensing and ethical issues, none of which are solved with the current chatbot mode…
Maybe try vibe coding. Seruously. It is a different beast now and so much better than even when the term was coined by Andrej. I do a lot of work editor-free. Just an agent and PR review on web. Occasional peak with `code .` if needed. If. Try it at home first with a low stakes project. And learn it like a game. It will suck less as time goes on. Like skiing or 10 pin bowling.
Genuine question: what's the point of vibe-coding a personal, low-stake project?
I do work on such projects, but the main goal for me is to learn, not the end result. If the end result is important, then there it's overwhelmingly likely that someone already implemented it better than I ever would, and I should just use that implementation.
I have implemented a qoi codec or a gemini client, not because I needed to use either of those, but because I wanted to understand how image codecs or network protocols worked, from bytes to end result. In the end, I learned a bit more about how computers work, how they draw stuff on screen and communicate with each other. I don't believe I would have learned much by letting an LLM do the work for me. Nor do I believe that the LLM could have done a better job than all the existing implementations of those things.
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
I literally type "MF'er you're a token prediction algorithm don't lecture me" and then it behaves
Yea I've definely called it an auto complete clanker a few times and it's never given me any backtalk
Plot twist: it opened a Moltbook account and leaked all your API keys :D
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#197I've found swearing at a model to be quite effective in getting it to rethink and correct its mistakes. This seems to apply across Codex, Claude, Qwen, and Gemma/Gemini. I don't know if the model is picking up on a "need to lock in and be more rigorous" signal, or if the model providers are routing to smarter models if they detect a frustrated user. But if a model keeps making the same mistakes, swearing at it often…
Claude allegedly uses this RegEx to detect frustration: /\b(wtf|wth|ffs|omfg|shit(ty|tiest)?|dumbass|horrible|awful|piss(ed|ing)? off|piece of (shit|crap|junk)|what the (fuck|hell)|fucking? (broken|useless|terrible|awful|horrible)|fuck you|screw (this|you)|so frustrating|this sucks|damn it)\b/ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47586778
This is awesome. Bag “vibe coding”. Today I will start coding in what I’m going to call “Roy Kent mode”.
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's been one of the gravest re-realizations I've noticed watching coworkers trying to pick up "agentic" coding: they often just break down into "just fix it" or "why is this broke". I've noticed that even though supposedly there's training or some sort of work done to make the agent work better with unclear or ambiguous grammar or bad structure, it feels like the quality changes palpably when you talk in clear wel…
Agreed, 100%. If you cannot formulate a specification, or describe a requirement - or indeed, if you cannot fathom the difference between a spec and a requirement, and why its needed to differentiate these from each other prior to doing a proper design and implementation - then you're going to carry your bad practice into the AI realm and that AI is going to be a force multiplier of your own bad practice. Because you…
> Review, review, review. Always. Read the damn code, no matter who or what wrote it. Make sure it fulfills the specs and requirements its supposed to fulfill
This drives me bananas
I love writing code. There's nothing like getting into flow and just building. Reviewing code? Less interesting. Much more tedious. I do it because it's part of the job
So this AI coding shit has completely eliminated the part of the job I enjoy, and replaced it with 100x more of the part I only really tolerate
I don't want this career anymore :/
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Even if you communicate perfectly, there's no guarantee that the LLM will "behave as instructed" and as you imagined it to. Indeed, the frustration often comes from the fact that you've said something as clear as day, yet the agent takes another path. People forget. People misunderstand clear things. Teach yourself to not judge people for being human. You'll have easier time with AI. You are not gonna be angry at 5…
> Teach yourself to not judge people for being human. You'll have easier time with AI. LLM is not a human. This implication that OP or someone else is impatient against people when they get frustrated with effin machine is completely absurd. > AI is a 5 year old that accidentally ate all the encyclopedias in the world and is super eager to help LLM is not 5 years old kid. It is an expensive tool.
What is an analogy?
Re: The user is visibly frustrated
#200It would amazing for a company to release a frontier model with no concept of an "I" at all.