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

131–140 of 551 posts

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

#131

Post by visarga »

emodendroket wrote: post #103
dabinat wrote: post #73

It surprises me how many people have voluntarily relegated their entire job to LLM Prompter. If your work is indistinguishable from that of a machine, what’s to stop your boss cutting out the middleman and using the machine directly? I would have thought that people would be trying their hardest to prove their worth in this new world we’re in.

Well, if everyone is telling you they want you to adapt AI, then it's rational to see just how much of your job you can get it to do for you.

It's even worse when everyone around you is using it. How can you keep up? Companies face the same dilemma: investors, competitors, and users already use AI and have factored it into their expectations.

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

#132

Post by therealdrag0 »

mysterydip wrote: post #80
LambdaComplex wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

What I don’t understand is what value is the person adding to this equation? Put another way, what’s the difference between them feeding the wall of text to the LLM, and you feeding the wall of text to the LLM, bypassing them in the process entirely?

Peer review, in this case, “did you use AI to review your change and address its feedback”.

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

#133

Post by taneq »

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…

It’s much more effort to verify that code is correct than it is to produce it. This is the case even for human-written code, and now that we face a torrent of ok-looking probably-usable AI generated code, the problem is compounded infinitely.

If someone’s using AI to generate a large quantity of actually-tested, actually-good code then that’s one thing. If they’re generating a fire hose of slop and demanding that others do the actual human time-consuming work of validating that code then that person is the problem. It’s hard to tell which is the case here.

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

#134

Post by politician »

Jensson wrote: post #70
LambdaComplex wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Try to automate the adversarial PR review-rebuttal loop "for productivity", so the back-and-forth between the AIs can run over night.

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

#135

Post by manyatoms »

voidfunc wrote: post #52
CoastalCoder wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like one potential interpretation of his behavior is that he values his own time more than your time. I wonder if that's occurred to him.

AI and companies reward sociopathic behavior. When he eventually complains to his boss that his work isn't being merged and it's been done for days/weeks/months that will filter up and look bad on the people holding him up.

I'm sure this person's manager knows that having trouble getting PRs reviewed can (but not always) be a signal of a deeper problem. It could be that no one one the team knows the domain, it could be that no one like the person, but most likely it's that the PRs are frequently bad and no one wants to bother.

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

#136

Post by al_borland »

Gigachad wrote: post #31
nonethewiser wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instinctively I think the move is to ignore it. I guess that would look different in different contexts. Obviously you have to communicate with your coworkers. But I think the solution has to essential be: "Im not going to read that."

Either that, or call them / walk up to their desk and pick a point from the wall of text and ask them to explain what they mean by it. Then watch them turn red as they have no idea what the message they sent to you means.

I tried this when my skip level boss sent us a wall of text from ChatGPT that didn’t make any sense. He didn’t care. He said it was “just an idea”. He likely spent all of 5 minutes on it, while we spent a collective 15 hours dealing with it, before finally going to him and calling it out.

He’s sent a couple more emails like that since. I don’t even bother to read them once I see the format.

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

#137

Post by lelanthran »

emodendroket wrote: post #99
CoastalCoder wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like one potential interpretation of his behavior is that he values his own time more than your time. I wonder if that's occurred to him.

Well, what's the solution here, he should ship less stuff?

> Well, what's the solution here, he should ship less stuff?

The solution is in the title - he wants human attention, he needs to demonstrate human effort.

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

#138

Post by deadbabe »

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…

why not just approve the PRs with little more than a cursory glance?

One of two things will happen:

1. Things start breaking, proving AI generated code sucks and the individual spamming these PRs is incompetent.

2. The code works fine and reviews are unnecessary for anything other than liability concerns.

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

#139

Post by usefulcat »

emodendroket wrote: post #99
CoastalCoder wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like one potential interpretation of his behavior is that he values his own time more than your time. I wonder if that's occurred to him.

Well, what's the solution here, he should ship less stuff?

The solution is to merge more of his PRs on the condition that he takes at least partial responsibility for any resulting problems.

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

#140

Post by manyatoms »

Geezus_42 wrote: post #87
xgulfie wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if they say "idk Claude did it", what would you write in the PR review box?

REJECTED: Engineer does not understand what they wrote.

Feels like the title of a blog post someone will write
Post reply on HN