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

"Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

correresmidestino.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 408 posts

Re: "Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

#211

Post by customguy »

Blackthorn wrote: post #198
toddmorey wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always imagine the model rolling its silicon eyes when it’s assigned a personality (“you are an expert growth hacker”) at the start of the prompt. Was that ever actually shown to be effective? Is it still?

At least in the beginning of spicy autocomplete, this sort of role-play did work pretty dramatically at aligning a conversation to a task, though I don't think anyone ever tested it versus somewhat less cringe priming. After that, cargo cults do what they do best.

> though I don't think anyone ever tested it versus somewhat less cringe priming.

I really wonder if phrasing it differently would make a difference. In good faith conversations, it just doesn't happen that someone tells someone else who that person is.

Re: "Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

#212

Post by pvillano »

hyperpape wrote: post #200
Drupon wrote: post #14

An honest to god article full of em dashes that's not because it was AI but because it was a human using them as a crutch to get around crafting sentences that flow naturally. Almost brings a tear to my eye.

First sentence: > In my Ottawa life, every Tuesday evening, I take two gym classes back to back—boxing and the pompously named “body sculpt,” which makes me discover muscles I didn’t know I had. The em-dash matches how you'd speak out loud. You'd say "I take two classes every Tuesday back to back, boxing and 'body sculpt'. Weird name." (Parts of that sentence did flow oddly, but not because of the em-dash). Grammaria…

When I write like I talk, I use a lot of commas. Replacing some of my commas with em dashies, so long as it was done judiciously, would probably make things easier to chunk.

Re: "Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

#213

Post by aphroz »

xp84 wrote: post #45

The ending is a really powerful point. Most people apparently agree on two things: 1. AI is a great boon for all tasks and specialties we don’t have the skills to do ourselves. Understandable, since (A) we’re ill equipped to see the flaws in its output because it isn’t our area of expertise, and (B) it often can unlock great gains because if we trust it, we then don’t have to pay and wait for humans to do that thing.…

Except that it is also quite difficult to assess the quality of a doctor or a software developer if you don't work in the field.

I've heard numerous cases where AI solved medical issues that doctor couldn't.

Re: "Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

#214

Post by [deleted] »

Aurornis wrote: post #118
xp84 wrote: post #45

The ending is a really powerful point. Most people apparently agree on two things: 1. AI is a great boon for all tasks and specialties we don’t have the skills to do ourselves. Understandable, since (A) we’re ill equipped to see the flaws in its output because it isn’t our area of expertise, and (B) it often can unlock great gains because if we trust it, we then don’t have to pay and wait for humans to do that thing.…

> This is why I use AI for all my medical questions and doctors use AI to write software, and we both smirk at the quality the other person is getting from it. There is an interesting third group emerging: People who acknowledge the quality problem, but think they can deal with it by applying more AI to the output. This takes the form of people who spin up a lot of "agents" and give them personalities like security d…

[deleted]

Re: "Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

#215

Post by karakoram »

Safe to say OP just does NOT like AI https://correresmidestino.com/sorry-i-was-busy-unfucking-my-...

Poor woman should really look into pivoting her career or finding a different way of making money. Truth be told, her industry/career is not going to get better. Consistent work will just not fall from the sky.

Being bitter will not improve her situation. Even organizations like UN/OECD are looking into implementing AI in various ways.

Really good blog though. I love life blogs like these! You can go back and live through so many interesting/pivotal moments.

Re: "Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

#216

Post by senordevnyc »

ixtli wrote: post #43
tombert wrote: post #9

I have no doubt that the writer is better at translating than AI, but I have to say that AI translation has gotten so good that I'm not sure how much longer translation work will be there, or rather it might end up being more about auditing. For example, I just read the Lawrence Ellsworth translation of The Three Musketeers, which I very thoroughly enjoyed. I don't speak or read French, but from my understanding Ells…

This is sort of missing the point-- people who dont deal with linguistics dont understand that there are multiple types of translation. There's word for word (which is what you're talking about) and sense for sense. If you let an LLM do all of your translation you're letting it interpret huge amounts of intent and context it doesnt (and probably cant) access. The ways in which this impacts the translation will foreve…

If you let an LLM do all of your translation you're letting it interpret huge amounts of intent and context it doesnt (and probably cant) access.

What’s the intent and context that a human translator of a text is typically privy to that an LLM is not?

Re: "Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

#217

Post by Kiro »

CGMthrowaway wrote: post #76
xp84 wrote: post #45

The ending is a really powerful point. Most people apparently agree on two things: 1. AI is a great boon for all tasks and specialties we don’t have the skills to do ourselves. Understandable, since (A) we’re ill equipped to see the flaws in its output because it isn’t our area of expertise, and (B) it often can unlock great gains because if we trust it, we then don’t have to pay and wait for humans to do that thing.…

Well said. Everyone agrees AI can't do their job, so it ends up doing everyone else's. I'm not sure how to formulate it yet but it seems there is some Peter Principle/Gell-Mann Effect corollary that is AI-related we can say here. Perhaps: "AI rises to the level of its users' incompetence." Or: "Confidence in AI output is inversely proportional to one's ability to verify it"

> Everyone agrees AI can't do their job, so it ends up doing everyone else's.

In real life I haven't met a single programmer who doesn't think AI can do their job.

If someone would actually say that I would immediately think they have hubris and overestimate their skills.

Re: "Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

#218

Post by keeganpoppen »

throw-the-towel wrote: post #199
Aurornis wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is why I use AI for all my medical questions and doctors use AI to write software, and we both smirk at the quality the other person is getting from it. There is an interesting third group emerging: People who acknowledge the quality problem, but think they can deal with it by applying more AI to the output. This takes the form of people who spin up a lot of "agents" and give them personalities like security d…

> People who acknowledge the quality problem, but think they can deal with it by applying more AI to the output. Brute Force: if it doesn't work, you're just not using enough. What if they're right though?

they are right. bad output is user error. there, am i suiting the role appropriately? i do like 65% believe that, fwiw.

Re: "Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

#219

Post by singpolyma3 »

chrsw wrote: post #155
xp84 wrote: post #45

The ending is a really powerful point. Most people apparently agree on two things: 1. AI is a great boon for all tasks and specialties we don’t have the skills to do ourselves. Understandable, since (A) we’re ill equipped to see the flaws in its output because it isn’t our area of expertise, and (B) it often can unlock great gains because if we trust it, we then don’t have to pay and wait for humans to do that thing.…

My fear is in the future it won't matter. People will accept slop because while they can be convinced it's not as good as it could be, it's good enough. To them it's good enough because it's fast and cheap not because it's actually good. There won't be any room in the economy for the value human output brings because the economy will rearrange itself around AI and become completely dependent on cheap output, good eno…

I think so many users have been conditioned (long before AI) to think of computers as buggy, unreliable annoyances rather than power tools and so slop just lives up to their low expectations.

Re: "Don't You Just Upload It to ChatGPT?"

#220

Post by kevinwang »

anigbrowl wrote: post #158
olivierestsage wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Em dashes are really good actually and a standard stylistic choice for non-technical writing, particularly outside the US.

They certainly have their place, but are massively overused in contemporary American prose. This might be slight more of an east coast thing, but that's just a subjective impression that I'm not willing to spend time measuring. To me they come off as faddish, with many writers using them where commas and semicolons would have done just as well. I think their popularity stems from teh fact that provide the sense of a…

I use them because I know what I want to say out loud, but transcribing the pause with commas is incorrect because it's a comma splice, and I find that the semicolon often looks glaringly overly formal. So I've settled on the em-dash.
Post reply on HN