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

The human-in-the-loop is tired

pydantic.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 221 posts

Re: The human-in-the-loop is tired

#151

Post by skydhash »

throw1234567891 wrote: post #136
adamddev1 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember when I was just learning how to code and making some web app, I had to do a lot more blind guessing and running. "Ok let me try this... Will that work now?" I remember staying up really late, feeling stuck to the computer in that slot machine mode. Then when I learned more I got less and less of that guessing feeling. I understood what I was building and what would work, I began using typed languages and c…

It's a trip back to a guesswork stage because most of the training data looks like the process you described your beginnings have been like. Now you know how to do things first shot. When you write the code, your inner voice reminds you ahead of time to do it like this and that. And that "this and that" is what your prompt needs to have to avoid the trip to guesswork. Working with agents is like working with juniors.…

> The difference is, your brain finds guardrails as you solve the problem, the LLM doesn't have this context, you have to give it upfront. Like, you know, a good manager would

Not really the same feeling. It’s more like speaking a foreign language. At the beginning, you’re always guessing at words, and what’s the correct structure/expression. After a few years, you can go direct from idea to sentences.

Today, my brain is familiar with “computer speak”. More often than not, it goes straight from ideas to algorithms and data structures. My time is mostly spent on checking assumptions (what’s the data type returned by this call,…) and verifying results (debugger, tests, printf,…).

Using LLM is like hiring an unreliable translator when I already know the language. Yes, it may speak faster than me, but I do not a faster pace of conversation.

Re: The human-in-the-loop is tired

#152

Post by customguy »

iso1631 wrote: post #143
DanielHB wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't understand what the OP said, your brain can get a intrinsic reward from seeing users use your LLM work. But LLM remove all the little intrinsic rewards from coding elegant systems to get to the point where you see users using your work. It is all about the destination now where it used to be about the journey and the destination.

I wrote some software nearly 20 years ago, haven't touched it for over a decade. The code was terrible, but I don't care, it did the job, and people still use it despite a whole team of people who have tried to replace it with "elegant" code in frameworks which have come and gone. The reason people still use it is that it solves their needs, not the programmer's needs. The goal was to make the user's life better, not…

All you're saying is that for you only the destination ever mattered. But it's very apparent that is not true for a lot of people.

And "solving needs" is kinda vague. We drank from lead cups for a long time, because perfect knowledge of material and biology was secondary to just having a cup. And no single sip from any lead cup killed or maybe even much harmed any person, but it all added and adds up.

Of course the comparison with lead is kinda over the top, but it's just to illustrate the principle. If your software crashes the computer 1 out of 1000 runs, and it otherwise crucial and unique, people will still use it, and the longer and the more people use it, the more human lifetime it "destroys". If it would take you 1 year to find the source of the crash, it may not be worth it, if it would take you 30 minutes, it might be. You just won't get recompensated for it, you'd have to get satisfaction from it via something like craftsmanship.

Your users don't know either way, so it's your job to know. Saying it's not, everybody just has to be content with the transaction, is a bit like saying a doctor doesn't have to do medicine according to what they know is likely best, but according to what their patient thinks they need.

Re: The human-in-the-loop is tired

#153

Post by phoghed »

luipugs wrote: post #149
AyanamiKaine wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to be a big fight between the I am interested in the end result and I am interested in the process. Some people think the same regarding art, they dont see art in the process only in the end result. I believe no one is right, but also no one is wrong.

There is no art without process though. The art is the process. Is an automatic piano more beautiful than a world class pianist? Of course not. I am not strictly equating this to coding though. Like the GP sometimes I am driven more by the product than by being able to make it by hand. But that does not mean vibe coding, I still make sure the code is up to my standards.

Maybe for the person who automated the piano it is

Re: The human-in-the-loop is tired

#157

Post by inigyou »

akeck wrote: post #24

Reminds me of "The Animal is Tired" (2021) ( https://www.robinhobb.com/blog/archives/2021-05 )

This site is blocking IP addresses. Here's a less-censored mirror: https://archive.is/RWxXP

This happens to everyone, very sadly. Arguably, feeling your own decay is not just sad, it's the greatest possible sadness and also what drove most mad people mad.

The author was 70 (now 75) and argues wishes he'd treated his own body better, but if he had, he would still be in the same position, but would have missed out on experiences whose memories I'm sure he now treasures. He once played in the snow too long and got frostbite? His feet would still be sore today if he hadn't, but he wouldn't have played in the snow.

Take care of your body as much as you can, but you can't treat it like a potion in a video game that you're always afraid to use in a fight because you might need it for the next fight. Eventually you get to the end of the game without using the potion.

And more somberly, every part of you can be sacrificed once or zero times to achieve something you believe is a greater purpose.

I'm still in some kind of emotional crisis as thinking about this sort of thing makes me break down crying.

Re: The human-in-the-loop is tired

#158

Post by jillesvangurp »

hahahaa wrote: post #4
N_Lens wrote: post #2

While I appreciate and agree with the key points of the post, Claude's writing style fingerprints are all over it and I guess it's even more exhausting to read someone's AI written article.

I don't think it is AI, but I bet it has been through editing/review to match a corporate style. LLMs were trained on this.

I just made chat gpt list all the key indications that this article was LLM generated. I'll spare you the details, it's a very long list.

It's actually possible to counter some of this stuff with skills and guard rails. The author clearly has not mastered how to do that and sound more authentic.

It's all a bit stunted, cringe, long winded, repetitive, etc.

Re: The human-in-the-loop is tired

#159

Post by dgan »

The whole premise of Anthropic and openai is to replace developers. I don't understand what mental gymnastics people are going thru to justify their 5 open claude sessions and tokenmaxxing

Like, they want to professionnaly, kill you. Theh are as much as a tool as is a cord pending from the ceiling

Re: The human-in-the-loop is tired

#160

Post by sokoloff »

johnfn wrote: post #67
onion2k wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you switch on the 'Supporting Evidence' on that site, it seems to be basing it's opinion on three things: - Use a descriptive triad of "reviewing, directing, and course" (it incorrectly misunderstood 'course correcting'). That's not common in writing but humans do do it occasionally. - Using the word 'thoughtful'. I don't understand that as evidence of AI. - Using the words 'Book Apart' together, which would be a…

Pangram clearly says "Remember, our results aren’t based on this evidence." when you turn on supporting evidence.

That’s an unusual use of “supporting” for sure.
Post reply on HN