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

Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

alexispurslane.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 611 posts

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#81

Post by ok_dad »

logicprog wrote: post #52
jchw wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry to say but I'm absolutely certain I would've preferred to read your worst attempt at a write-up over the grating utter shite LLMs output. It's not even a question, this is unreadable.

That's interesting; IME, most people get equally angry and are as likely to disengage with a superior tone over my autism-infodump verbose essay prose as with LLM output.

At least when I write an autistic info dump people know I wrote it. Why give your voice over to a corpo slop factory?

Heck, I use LLM assistance for coding and I’ve even coded up whole features with the clankers, but giving it the right to speak for me is too much.

I should also add that I read and understand every line of clanker output that I publish for others, so I’m not a vibe coder either, just adhd.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#82

Post by ellyagg »

hypfer wrote: post #76
dang wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This submission was heavily flagged, presumably because the article sounded like genai. But the article now says the following: > After posting this on Hacker News and recieving almost no substantive input, discussion, or response on the actual content of the article, I decided to rewrite all of the prose in my own voice. I've therefore turned off the flags and hopefully people can actually now discuss the claims/fin…

> I decided to rewrite all of the prose in my own voice. Soo... it didn't just sound like genai but was genai? ___ Huh. From the article: > If anyone complains about my verbosity or sentence structure — as they usually do, which is the reason I originally let the AI write the prose, among other reasons obsoleted by templating — they can go fuck themselves. This is kinda sad, honestly. But also should show the author…

Right so it’s gonna be a litmus test for knowledge workers going forward if they can separate style over substance. Genai tells are style. You have to be able to evaluate the ideas.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#83

Post by hypfer »

ellyagg wrote: post #82
hypfer wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I decided to rewrite all of the prose in my own voice. Soo... it didn't just sound like genai but was genai? ___ Huh. From the article: > If anyone complains about my verbosity or sentence structure — as they usually do, which is the reason I originally let the AI write the prose, among other reasons obsoleted by templating — they can go fuck themselves. This is kinda sad, honestly. But also should show the author…

Right so it’s gonna be a litmus test for knowledge workers going forward if they can separate style over substance. Genai tells are style. You have to be able to evaluate the ideas.

Hm. Nah. Why?

Why should I care? If it's a good thought, chances are it appears without slop around it. If it doesn't re-appear, life will still go on regardless.

No need to shift through noise just to avoid FOMO.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#84

Post by dang »

ellyagg wrote: post #82
hypfer wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I decided to rewrite all of the prose in my own voice. Soo... it didn't just sound like genai but was genai? ___ Huh. From the article: > If anyone complains about my verbosity or sentence structure — as they usually do, which is the reason I originally let the AI write the prose, among other reasons obsoleted by templating — they can go fuck themselves. This is kinda sad, honestly. But also should show the author…

Right so it’s gonna be a litmus test for knowledge workers going forward if they can separate style over substance. Genai tells are style. You have to be able to evaluate the ideas.

I doubt that you can separate style from substance in that way, because you can't separate writing from thinking.

I agree that it will be interesting to see how this develops going forward. One can imagine wildly varying scenarios.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#85

Post by ajkjk »

hypfer wrote: post #76
dang wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This submission was heavily flagged, presumably because the article sounded like genai. But the article now says the following: > After posting this on Hacker News and recieving almost no substantive input, discussion, or response on the actual content of the article, I decided to rewrite all of the prose in my own voice. I've therefore turned off the flags and hopefully people can actually now discuss the claims/fin…

> I decided to rewrite all of the prose in my own voice. Soo... it didn't just sound like genai but was genai? ___ Huh. From the article: > If anyone complains about my verbosity or sentence structure — as they usually do, which is the reason I originally let the AI write the prose, among other reasons obsoleted by templating — they can go fuck themselves. This is kinda sad, honestly. But also should show the author…

The em dashes are fine.

If someone gives them shit about their writing, that's on the critic for being shitty. If they use AI to write, that's on them for being fake. But, to write online at all requires being ready to have people be shitty to you and ideally not reacting in a way that makes the situation worse. Sounds like they need work on that part.

Anyway it is basically always possible for someone to find something legitimately bad about anything a person does. The question is, how much of an issue is that? Not much actually. So you have flaws. Fine, just be flawed. It had no affect on your life beyond your reaction to the attack. And putting aside that reaction is a prerequisite for learning anything useful (or discerning that there is nothing to learn) from the experience.

Good people will trust good intentions through the flaws, while shitty people will write off your work and your intentions because of the flaws (and try to make sure you feel bad about it in the process). But it's always they're too weak to express disagreement maturely, or sometimes because they're bitter and threatened by your good intentions directly. Either way, it's their flaw, not yours.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#86

Post by dang »

ex-aws-dude wrote: post #75
dang wrote: post #91

[stub for offtopicness] [see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48416020 for how all this happened in the first place]

So the original unfounded claim has 400+ comments because its perfect HN ragebait The author provides evidence to the contrary and the HNers won't even engage with it instead just talking about the writing of the article in classic HN bikeshedding fashion. How about after that we talk about the formatting of the website and the colors? This site is really going down hill Where is the accountability for your own opini…

Comments like this do more of what they complain about, only with an extra layer of judgment.

It would be preferable if someone would seed a better discussion by engaging with the article's claims/observations.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#87

Post by grey-area »

skeledrew wrote: post #55
jchw wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry to say but I'm absolutely certain I would've preferred to read your worst attempt at a write-up over the grating utter shite LLMs output. It's not even a question, this is unreadable.

I read it perfectly fine. I see content, not style.

Style is also part of the content. Word choice, grammar, register, and tone all affect meaning and communication of that meaning. The medium is part of the message.

So your statement betrays a significant misunderstanding - there is no neat clean divide between style and content.

Also, LLMs often generate text that is plausible, but wrong, in ways big and small.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#88

Post by grey-area »

jchw wrote: post #62
aozgaa wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, it seems HN does not like to read llm-generated articles. I ran into this myself when using an llm to edit some stuff I wrote. At the time, I found this a bit irritating, but with a few weeks time I see the merit. The informational content tends to fall into “derivative” territory when LLM’s write stuff. And people are here for novelty and some socialization. Also LLM prose seems optimized for engagement…

I just find it to be utter dreck. It has one of the most agitating prose styles I've ever seen. I would legitimately rather read actual broken English than the cliché polished turds Claude pops out. I am not an LLM hater, I think these tools are pretty impressive and often even useful, but even if I didn't care about the fact that I want to read communication from humans and not robots (and I do care about that, FWIW…

I think it’s just people don’t read before voting, they upvote on the headline and then come to discuss it here.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#89

Post by grey-area »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #79
jchw wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really struggle to believe you wrote text like: > A simple distributional analysis of every rsync release with bug data. No model. No assumptions. Just placement.

I don't even know what "just placement" is. (I need a better model to translate from llmese.)

Sometimes the things word generators say just don’t make sense.

Re: Did Claude increase bugs in rsync?

#90

Post by hypfer »

ajkjk wrote: post #85
hypfer wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I decided to rewrite all of the prose in my own voice. Soo... it didn't just sound like genai but was genai? ___ Huh. From the article: > If anyone complains about my verbosity or sentence structure — as they usually do, which is the reason I originally let the AI write the prose, among other reasons obsoleted by templating — they can go fuck themselves. This is kinda sad, honestly. But also should show the author…

The em dashes are fine. If someone gives them shit about their writing, that's on the critic for being shitty. If they use AI to write, that's on them for being fake. But, to write online at all requires being ready to have people be shitty to you and ideally not reacting in a way that makes the situation worse. Sounds like they need work on that part. Anyway it is basically always possible for someone to find someth…

I don't think that you can successfully dismiss an obvious AI writing marker with

"No these are fine, now look over there!! "

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain?

Post reply on HN