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

Proof of care in the age of AI

jacobfilipp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 119 posts

Re: Proof of care in the age of AI

#11

Post by fxwin »

bcjdjsndon wrote: post #6

Don't handwrite your next post and definitely don't start writing in your own back to front cryptic code. The reality is people don't always care if a human poured their heart and soul into something. Sometimes they do, but not always. It's like lamented handwritten script when the printing press was invented....

> The reality is people don't always care if a human poured their heart and soul into something.

That's fine, but I don't think the author would suggest writing e.g. library documentation by hand. It's clearly advice for the creator side of the problem of low signal-to-noise ratio in the digital space and how to stand out/signal, rather than a general rule

Re: Proof of care in the age of AI

#12

Post by jvanderbot »

bcjdjsndon wrote: post #6

Don't handwrite your next post and definitely don't start writing in your own back to front cryptic code. The reality is people don't always care if a human poured their heart and soul into something. Sometimes they do, but not always. It's like lamented handwritten script when the printing press was invented....

LLM slop is considered low value because it contains a low information/minute as well as a low effort/minute signal. You want to know that the reader put more effort in than you do, and that it is worth your time. The effort signal just points to a possible high information/minute return.

When someone takes the laborious effort to provide a short paragraph on an insanely complex topic, precisely written without excessive hedging or jargon, and conveying a shortcut or mental model, I know they worked hard on it. That is still a valuable signal. No amount of fancy medium can top a well-framed idea concisely stated.

Re: Proof of care in the age of AI

#13

Post by halfax »

i think the point is good, hadwriting forces you to think more, even from typing the same.. BUT , i am unsure this would be proof you wrote it or AI genereated it , same with tatoos , AI can genereate picutres of said Tatoo...

Re: Proof of care in the age of AI

#15

Post by UnfitFootprint »

MontagFTB wrote: post #10

TLDR proof of care from the article: a low bandwidth process (e.g., from handwriting to tattooing it on your body) that you voluntarily put your words through to convey their level of personal importance. Some of his examples were tongue in cheek. But even handwriting feels a little too laborious when what we lost that needs replacement is manual typing.

Not to mention accessibility, which as usual benefits everyone with features such as text search, so I guess we‘ll keep looking for an answer.

Typewriters?

Re: Proof of care in the age of AI

#18

Post by The_Blade »

amelius wrote: post #5

We need a proof-of-care coin.

i just learned that these exist so you can like, prove that humanitarian funds that were supposed to fund surgery in civil war-torn Africa were actually used to perform surgery

that seems pretty ripe for a new Geldof / Bono combo to use thinking they are doing good

Re: Proof of care in the age of AI

#19

Post by malty_on_rock »

This was something that bugged me while writing. Someone even asked, What's the point if people aren't going to read the whole thing? Reading this made my day, not just because of the content, but because someone else cared enough to tackle the same problem. Good one, Sire.

Re: Proof of care in the age of AI

#20

Post by bcjdjsndon »

jvanderbot wrote: post #12
bcjdjsndon wrote: post #6

Don't handwrite your next post and definitely don't start writing in your own back to front cryptic code. The reality is people don't always care if a human poured their heart and soul into something. Sometimes they do, but not always. It's like lamented handwritten script when the printing press was invented....

LLM slop is considered low value because it contains a low information/minute as well as a low effort/minute signal. You want to know that the reader put more effort in than you do, and that it is worth your time. The effort signal just points to a possible high information/minute return. When someone takes the laborious effort to provide a short paragraph on an insanely complex topic, precisely written without exces…

> I know they worked hard on it. That is still a valuable sign

An infant scrawling the alphabet in its own excrement would have that "signal"...

Post reply on HN