Live data from Hacker News

Not everyone is using AI for everything

gabrielweinberg.com

381–390 of 565 posts

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#381
post #82
post #72

On the post-grad job hunt right now - I note that most employers will ask in a technical interview or whiteboard interview "how are you using LLMs?" It's tough to answer because you want to hedge for both an AI enthused employer and an AI hesitant employer with limited information about who they are and how they personally use these products. I've been responding with a sort of long winded answer about how 'there is…

> It's tough to answer because you want to hedge for both an AI enthused employer and an AI hesitant employer with limited information about who they are and how they personally use these products. Have you considered just answering truthfully? Would you even want to work somewhere where you need to play a role and where they flip out when you say the wrong word you should've correctly guessed through mind reading? T…

>Have you considered just answering truthfully?

It's a job interview, you're not supposed to do that, and they don't appreciate it when you do. Try something like:

  - Where do you see yourself in 5 years?
  - Working at a much better company than 
    this shithole
and see how it goes.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Search isn’t generative AI. There are a lot of people arguing in this thread that actually everyone is using generative AI without engaging with the source material at all. Why do you think that is?

I disagree. Searching in google now IS using generative AI.

Google has made searching also include a default LLM response. There are also search results. When you search with Google, an LLM is prompted, for sure. It’s also pretty clearly a separate feature that’s been tacked on to search.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or just write it yourself?

If you already know what the inputs/outputs are, why should you spend days or weeks of your life typing it out rather than giving it in a well-specified and tested form to an LLM to get it done a hundred times faster?

The behavior of an LLM is not and cannot be “well-specified”.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#384
post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume it's because he is seeking to pay rent, food bills, and other expenses through employment.

A truthful, nuanced, well reasoned answer will be well received by an employer with a culture you want to work in.

>A truthful, nuanced, well reasoned answer will be well received by an employer with a culture you want to work in.

If you're into long shot betting AND your savings aren't running out while waiting to land a new job, that might be a good strategy

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#385
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the pressure to get employed from your perspective, but differences in opinion should be voiced out and typically aren't the thing leading to rejection from the company. It's common that engineering leads seek out people with different backgrounds and views to work on the same team. If anything, answering truthfully will make you stand out from others who've responded in a generic, heavily hedged way.

4 years into job hunting. Answering truthfully does not work. Nobody likes the truth, and every bit of advise i get from anyone is to lie (though, some of them use euphemisms to avoid saying "lie").

This might not describe you, but I've met quite a few people who made similar claims. The problem usually wasn't that their counterparty didn't want to hear the truth. More commonly, the problem was that these persons assumed (and were convinced) that they knew the truth. Truth is rarely absolute and someone claiming to know it is a red flag in my book. Double so if multiple persons indicated their disagreement. Again, not knowing the exact question and answer it is impossible to say if you are an exception, but even if you are, you need to improve communication skills - what good is knowing "the truth" if others reject it?

That said, best of luck on the job hunt! Sometimes it just takes some time for the right opportunity to come along.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#386
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty easy as an interviewer to spot when a candidate is hedging on a question, and it's the kind of thing that might get discussed in the post-interview debrief. "Wouldn't give a straight answer on question X" isn't an instant no-hire, but it's not a positive signal.

I just interviewed a guy and all three interviewers asked him functionally the same question. He hedged 3 times and we just wanted an honest answer...

The guy wanted a job, didn't know what answer you wanted for the job, and you guys were being assholes.

If you can accept that then you've learnt something.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider using agent mode for some things, you are definitely missing out. The analogy I've had for myself is that it feels like using a bulldozer to dig rather than a shovel. If you use it to dig archaeological artifacts, it can make things worse than you started. A lot of the work however, is just moving dirt around, so you are wasting time by using a shovel.

Digging with a bulldozer sounds like hard work. You mean a digger.

Language barrier (bulldozer is used as a placeholder in my native language) , I should have said heavy machinery

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#388
post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A truthful, nuanced, well reasoned answer will be well received by an employer with a culture you want to work in.

> A truthful, nuanced, well reasoned answer will be well received by an employer with a culture you want to work in. If you're into long shot betting AND your savings aren't running out while waiting to land a new job, that might be a good strategy

I don’t see why “truthful, nuanced, well reasoned” is the long-shot vs cagey and evasive.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#389

It's important to factor in just how many US adults are basically illiterate nowadays. As of 2023, 27% of American working-age adults were at a PIAAC Literacy Level of 1 or below, out of a total of 5 levels. This has gotten drastically worse in the past 10 years as, in 2013, Level 1 and below was only 17%. Full scores for 2023 are: % Level 1 or below: 27% Level 2: 29% Level 3: 31% Level 4/5: 13% For reference, Level…

"Response rates for this data collection were relatively low, both for the United States and for several other participating countries. There is evidence that procedures implemented to reduce bias associated with nonresponse have done so, and that the data are representative of the population. However, readers should be aware of the potential for bias and use caution when interpreting PIAAC results." These stats don'…

That's just a standard disclaimer.

This is just how it is out there. Ask teachers what students are like these days. Think about designing for users. Or cross-reference with other info on this topic.

And, in regard to colleges... you have to keep in mind just how many colleges there are, how much the quality differs, the relative workloads of different degrees. There are a lot of people graduating with a GPA quite close to 2.0 at that full range too.

Also, think of how many college graduates never finish a book again after graduating college. Those numbers judge 18 to 65. And the age stats show that the older cohorts drag the scores down significantly.

The only upside to all of this is that it at least makes the chaos out there in the world make a bit more sense.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#390
post #367

Good piece, but I think there's a missing angle to it. He cites a study showing how often people say they "use AI", and a little over 50% use it less than once per week. If we're just talking about AI chat interfaces, sure. But I think the way that AI usage is going to grow isn't mostly by getting more chat engagement. It's about baking AI features into software that people already use. For example, suppose you asked…

I'd say this argument is not relevant to the specific question the article tries to answer, as AI adoption through these means is forced and may in many cases go against user preferences.

Edit: The deciding factor being whether you want to figure out if people are interested in AI / find it useful, or if the question you seek answered is more akin to "X% of people consume lead in their food"

Post reply on HN