Live data from Hacker News

LLMs reward expertise

seangoedecke.com

31–40 of 606 posts

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#31
Yes. I agree with most, if not all of this. For instance, I am seeing folks either relying in the LLM as an _assumed_ expert or, assuming someone - who knows the structure of skill definitions - also has some expertise (in the area of the skill). It's a difficult situation; there is not much point in explaining _why_ the LLM output or skill in use (on a domain problem) isn't what the person actually _needs_ to address the domain problem, because the person isn't a domain expert or indeed, adjacent to domain expertise. But, it is an interesting experiemnt to arm folk with little domain expertise with the _skill_ necessary to be able to extract the right solution from the model.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#32

Not sure I agree with this. The math guy at anthropic's prompts are essentially: "suppose you’ve gotta resolve the $CONJECTURE, like absolutely have to, everything depends on it. think really hard, and try to come up with a bunch of ideas to try. but remember to trust yourself and not necessarily in conventional wisdom!!" https://claude.ai/share/25740bd5-aa97-4bd7-bf58-c4df3793fda7 https://xcancel.com/__alpoge__/stat…

[flagged]

He's on to us, boys! Call in a code 43.

(Sorry, I'm in a crappy mood, but what on Earth are we supposed to take away from this? Everyone who disagrees with you is secretly an idiot, or worse, they're smart enough to know they're idiots but too proud to admit it?)

On a more helpful note, I think your "confusion" if honest can probably be resolved by realizing that "skeptics" are not a monolith.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#33

Not sure I agree with this. The math guy at anthropic's prompts are essentially: "suppose you’ve gotta resolve the $CONJECTURE, like absolutely have to, everything depends on it. think really hard, and try to come up with a bunch of ideas to try. but remember to trust yourself and not necessarily in conventional wisdom!!" https://claude.ai/share/25740bd5-aa97-4bd7-bf58-c4df3793fda7 https://xcancel.com/__alpoge__/stat…

[flagged]

This is becoming such a common statement on here it’s almost copy pasta.

Maybe the answer is more along the lines of “people are using them for different things and getting different results”?

Why does it have to be snark and “these people must be stupid”

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately the software industry is saying things like "don't look at the code", "LLMs have made developers 10-100x faster", etc. The only way they can make such claims is by saying what you said above: "Claude, make me Microsoft Flight Simulator, make no mistakes". Additionally engineers are facing pressures via deadlines to work in the paradigm of "Claude, make me Microsoft Flight Simulator, make no mistakes"...

The question i wonder about is, when will an event come along that persuades everyone that human understanding is still required? Or will it never come?

I wonder the same thing. I think we've already seen some of this happening, however the consequences haven't been large enough to the organization, for example:

- https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/mar/20/meta-ai-a...

- https://tech.yahoo.com/articles/ai-code-wreaked-havoc-amazon...

- https://alexeyondata.substack.com/p/how-i-dropped-our-produc...

We can only hope that engineers working in safety critical systems haven't fallen to these working conditions.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#35
This is also why people's experience with LLMs/AI varies so much, because some people can see a use for AI for their needs and go about using the tool, while others do not as it relates to whatever they're working on and so they may say "LLMs/AI are useless" (it doesn't mean they're not experts though, although some people who have totally no expertise might also see no use for AI for themselves).

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#36

Not sure I agree with this. The math guy at anthropic's prompts are essentially: "suppose you’ve gotta resolve the $CONJECTURE, like absolutely have to, everything depends on it. think really hard, and try to come up with a bunch of ideas to try. but remember to trust yourself and not necessarily in conventional wisdom!!" https://claude.ai/share/25740bd5-aa97-4bd7-bf58-c4df3793fda7 https://xcancel.com/__alpoge__/stat…

> who these models reward/empower

The easy, straightforward answer is "the people who own the models". Who else benefits feels like a more complex question and we'll have to see...

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#37

Not sure I agree with this. The math guy at anthropic's prompts are essentially: "suppose you’ve gotta resolve the $CONJECTURE, like absolutely have to, everything depends on it. think really hard, and try to come up with a bunch of ideas to try. but remember to trust yourself and not necessarily in conventional wisdom!!" https://claude.ai/share/25740bd5-aa97-4bd7-bf58-c4df3793fda7 https://xcancel.com/__alpoge__/stat…

[flagged]

I think it's the same thing as it was with googling. "Oh you're such a wizard problem solver, how did you fix my printer??" "I just typed the most important words about the problem as you told it to me, the printer's model number and 'solution' and a forum link was on the first page, searched the page for 'solved' and followed the 3 simple steps of which buttons to press."

Then you saw how other people used Google, by filling the search bar with utterly irrelevant words, missing the one key word that's most important to what they are trying to do, then not be able to evaluate the returned search results and triage for which is most "solution-shaped", and they get drawn into wrong search hits, reading a clearly irrelevant page instead of quickly backing out to the search results page to try another page etc.

Or see how people couldn't formulate questions on StackOverflow, other than dumping a huge code chunk and saying "it doesn't work".

Now, AI makes these easier. You can now really just type natural language into the textbox, not just key words, you don't have to know about quote marks and plus signs etc. You can paste the code and say it doesn't work, and the AI just might actually spot a bug.

But having general problem solving common sense will still give you very good dividends.

Re: LLMs reward expertise

#38
Overall, I agree, when I ask things I'm an expert in and do professionally every day. I get very good useful answers. When, for example, our marketing people, ask about the science, they often get confusing and wrong answers.
Post reply on HN