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

If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

tombedor.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 551 posts

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#61

Post by folkrav »

johnsmith1840 wrote: post #4
sublinear wrote: post #2

I think the real problem is that AI quality falls short of the wild promises. Labeling what is "AI" would be like highlighting in an email what I'm obligated to say by HR, my boss, etc. It doesn't make anything less boneheaded. Human effort was already low before AI and now it's even lower. Garbage in, garbage out.

AI having poor quality is a bad take like over a year ago.

Meh. Just this week, I've had two Sonnet 4.8 agents generate, in parallel, a 2000 line wall of brittle bullshit, and a well architected solution with 20% of the amount of code, to the same problem, from the exact same initial context, and very similar prompts. Come on, they can do poor quality work too.

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#62

Post by glennericksen »

niuzeta wrote: post #34

A very prolific coworker who fully embraced claude has inflicted the team with a flood of AI-generated PRs. About six months later, it is his frequent bemoaning at the standup that their PR don't get reviewed, languishing in inattention. I don't think anyone - including myself - _intentionally_ avoid his PRs. It's just that he doesn't make it easy for the team to look at. This single headline perfectly captures what…

I like this rule of thumb: Spend more effort producing the work than it takes for someone else to consume it.

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#64

Post by edot »

derivagral wrote: post #44
edot wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some things, yes. But I'm half-assing some really cool stuff right now. Made a scraper to pull my city's meeting minutes, agendas, recordings, made transcripts. Regex for "Flock", found every mention, passed those files into a cheap model (DeepSeek V4), had an understanding of who in my city is down with building the surveillance state and who isn't. I've got research on everyone, and had emails drafted for each…

Did you use some stuff like https://github.com/CouncilDataProject or roll your own? Been curious about how to integrate local knowledge like this since local news seems to have lost the niche.

I rolled my own. I hadn’t heard of this one, but I looked into stuff like OpenStates (now privately for-profit owned, ugh). My city just uses a Wordpress site so it’s structured enough. I’m looking at building something to ingest cities with Granicus and one other big local government meeting recorder via API whose name I forget. That should get decent coverage. There’s no way to catch the long tail of every local government’s recording process. Some cities people will just have to do manually. But it’s easy enough with LLM help.

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#65

Post by LambdaComplex »

Jimmc414 wrote: post #51
niuzeta wrote: post #34

A very prolific coworker who fully embraced claude has inflicted the team with a flood of AI-generated PRs. About six months later, it is his frequent bemoaning at the standup that their PR don't get reviewed, languishing in inattention. I don't think anyone - including myself - _intentionally_ avoid his PRs. It's just that he doesn't make it easy for the team to look at. This single headline perfectly captures what…

Fight fire with fire. Ask Fable to conduct an adversarial /ultareview of their PR and send the same wall of text back to them. If there are excessive defects, ask them in standup if they actually reviewed the PR themselves before sending it. If there aren’t maybe they are on to something. I think like in law, the human submitting the work is responsible for its quality, not the AI.

> Ask Fable to conduct an adversarial /ultareview of their PR and send the same wall of text back to them.

This won't help. Your wall of text will just get fed right back into the LLM.

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#66

Post by cool_dude85 »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #54
wahnfrieden wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why leave comments intended for your human colleague when they will only forward them to the bot? why not speak directly to the bot yourself instead? then you can drop pretenses and get to the point I find this to be a new variant of the old behavior where a colleague comments on a typo in a PR, and the team later moans about laborious back and forth for small nitpicks, instead of simply editing the typo right there…

let's take the two stories to management: "I'm writing tons of code, and the process is stumbling where the guy whose job it is to review code isn't reviewing it." "I'm not reviewing code." Sometimes I wonder: how does someone go and think so much about their coworkers, and never once think about how they themselves look? Even if I sympathize with the people complaining about their poorly chosen GitHub-based workflow…

Imagine you are a restaurant reviewer. Your job is unquestionably to go to restaurants, order and eat food, and write a review. The restaurant's job is to provide you food to eat and review.

You go to a new restaurant, and order some dishes, and one of the plates your server brings out is a big ol pile of dog shit.

Who's being anti-social in this situation? The restaurant is doing its job and all they're asking is that you do yours. On the other hand, you have certain expectations about what you order from the restaurant and they're not being met. Who's anti-social?

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#69

Post by NopIdoN »

keithnz wrote: post #29

More and more I'm generating AI emails, often to people outside the company and often to do with technical issues / integrations we have / APIs. So far I don't think the people I'm emailing are really using AI as human responses are, well, lacking. What would be great is new email conventions for different communication pathways. Human -> Human (think we have this sorted) AI -> Human AI -> AI If you are doing AI -> H…

tries to pass slop, complains about quality of replies

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#70

Post by Jensson »

LambdaComplex wrote: post #65
Jimmc414 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fight fire with fire. Ask Fable to conduct an adversarial /ultareview of their PR and send the same wall of text back to them. If there are excessive defects, ask them in standup if they actually reviewed the PR themselves before sending it. If there aren’t maybe they are on to something. I think like in law, the human submitting the work is responsible for its quality, not the AI.

> Ask Fable to conduct an adversarial /ultareview of their PR and send the same wall of text back to them. This won't help. Your wall of text will just get fed right back into the LLM.

It will help if your wall of text cost less tokens than theirs, they will run out before you do if you have the same company quota per person.
Post reply on HN