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

Don't be a meat proxy

gruhn.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 786 posts

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#391

Post by skydhash »

embedding-shape wrote: post #366
xyproto wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also very easy to dismiss everyone falling into the "AI trap" as being mediocre in the first place, though. But one just can't know this without having seen their work pre-AI.

I think people tend to forget that not only do we ourselves have different skillsets and can be amazing at one thing but horrible but another, but this also applies to other people in the world! Far all we know, there is an amazing developer out there who without LLMs, might have been the single best developer in the country, but even this person might not be able to figure out how to effectively work with LLMs. And…

> Far all we know, there is an amazing developer out there who without LLMs, might have been the single best developer in the country, but even this person might not be able to figure out how to effectively work with LLMs. And vice-versa too.

If working with LLMs effectively means accepting subpar results or be a reverse centaur, then I’d be glad not to be able to work with them.

I’ve never seen a good example where AI is a net positive to any development workflow. No one argues against compilers, build tools, IDEs, task runners, deploy and orchestration tools. Because they are great levers that lets you create more with less effort.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#392

Post by darkwater »

eddythompson80 wrote: post #143
maccard wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience is it’s over eager engineers who we would have historically considered not strong who suddenly feel able to contribute in a different way

I know exactly the persona you’re describing. It’s unfortunate because they have a great learning tool now. I always felt bad for over eager engineers who were not strong. They had the right attitude but I thought lacked the learning resources and perhaps the learning skills others stronger engineers had. Before if you found yourself in an area you don’t understand. Some people make it all the way through school with…

That's why we have courses and certifications!

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#393

Post by wseqyrku »

jpnc wrote: post #2

If you create a machine for laziness you're going to get lazy people. It's only going to get worse I'm afraid. Do you guys think we're going to see a de-evolution of human beings due to technology?

Only in corporate setting.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#394

Post by meowface »

ffsm8 wrote: post #56
eddythompson80 wrote: post #8

I deal with this all day long at work and it’s exhausting. People almost acting like no one has thought of it “I asked Claude what happened, and it spit out this 300 line response. Can you read it for me and see if it’s right?” What kills me is you might expect this from a busy high level manager that doesn’t really understand the technical details and they just point the AI to an error they got. They don’t know how…

At my dayjob there is a person spearheading ai across the enterprise. They generated lots of documentation across the whole stack and now makes all PO/BAs read it if it's correct. So not just 300 lines - he unironically generated thousands of lines of "documentation" and is now making hundreds of people review it for him Complete brainrot Au psychosis is getting seriously outrageous at this point Thankfully I'm a dev…

Everyone I know, including myself, is simultaneously extremely pro-AI and anti-AI for this reason.

I always put myself in the shoes of the reader when relaying Claudeslop. I either use it as a reference and write it by hand or make Claude edit it 10+ times until it's conveying only the needed information, and in simple, clear words, and without annoying Claudeisms.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#395

Post by [deleted] »

Sharlin wrote: post #344
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IQ is a measure that tests how well people can do IQ tests, I don't think it's an objective measure at all.

People love to say this, but the whole point of IQ is that it happens to correlate well with many other, more practical measures of cognitive capability. That’s why it is used.

[deleted]

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#396

Post by maccard »

LtWorf wrote: post #390
maccard wrote: post #91

At my last job, a coworker did this to me. The first time it happened, I ignored it. The second time, I responded in public saying “thanks but I can ask Claude myself.” Nobody ever pasted me an LLM response again. YMMV with team size and seniority though

I did a similar thing and I got reported to HR.

What was the outcome of the report to HR?

I think if you work somewhere that this is the result, you're unlikely to have much progress challenging anything directly. In order to actually have change you need to be able to challenge and stamp out these sorts of behaviours.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#397

Post by ndriscoll »

nmeagent wrote: post #345
Jensson wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who uses the word "obnoxious" are also obnoxious. There are many unpleasant words, you have to use some of them and people don't like any of them.

Would you refer to someone as a midwit in a typical office environment and expect your professional reputation to remain intact? If you were to do this on an ongoing basis for whatever reason, how long before you're asked to have a little chat with the folks in HR? Would you then attempt to explain it away as one of those unpleasant words that you just had to use? I want to be there for that conversation.

Corporate offices are low trust environments where people do not really openly speak directly in any negative way (for basically the reason you've illustrated), so I wouldn't use them as any kind of standard for normal social interaction.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#398

Post by jeremyjh »

DonsDiscountGas wrote: post #367
jeremyjh wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't the takeaway. The takeaway is that when someone asks for your input you give them Claude's. Why do we have you?

Unless they're a professional stack exchange responder (not a real job afaik) they probably do a lot besides answer random questions

That isn’t the topic of TFA.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#399

Post by maccard »

GrinningFool wrote: post #328
maccard wrote: post #91

At my last job, a coworker did this to me. The first time it happened, I ignored it. The second time, I responded in public saying “thanks but I can ask Claude myself.” Nobody ever pasted me an LLM response again. YMMV with team size and seniority though

At my current job I just asked a coworker in chat if the reply was his or LLM. He quickly owned up and the incidence of brokered LLM messages in chat dropped signficantly. Unfortunately people are being encouraged to use LLM in docs, emails, and presentations so it's probably a losing battle.

That's a better approach than what I did, and I'll use that going forwards.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#400

Post by ErroneousBosh »

jeremyjh wrote: post #286
Applejinx wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I don't know" is an extraordinarily powerful answer, but maybe it's getting ruined. I'm not sure it can be entirely ruined. In a human interaction, when used confidently, it means 'I'm so authoritative I don't even have to front. I don't have to do the slightest thing to impress you. My foundation is so secure it doesn't need defending or justification at all". Also, 'that turns out to be outside the massive quantit…

We are talking about questions in the context of reviewing a pull request. If I ask you a question about the code, and you have to ask Claude, or otherwise cannot tell me why the code that you wrote is the way it is, that is strike one of two.

Good catch to ask about the code &emdash; if you can't actually explain the code you wrote, why do you expect me to explain to you?

;-)

Post reply on HN