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

721–730 of 786 posts

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#721

Post by defgeneric »

danolivo wrote: post #471

A while back, I noticed that using Claude all day left me feeling mentally tired. After thinking it over, I realised the problem was Claude’s complex language. I’ve used English daily for years, so that shouldn’t be an issue. To compare, I switched Claude to my native language and had the same problem the author described. The text still needed to be literally deciphered before I could understand it. After talking wi…

I've seen this sentiment so much in the past month that it's starting to make me worried that the labs will silently make this the default output to satisfy users. I do recognize the outputs can be so information-dense that it strains reading for many but they absolutely aren't nonsense or mere affectation. What people are asking for now amounts to asking for less intelligence per token only a few months after everyone was demanding more intelligence per token.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#722

Post by icedchai »

leptons wrote: post #690
icedchai wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same. I'm being forced into a position where I'm supposed to do everything with AI agents, not write any manual code, and only act as a reviewer. It sounds like you know the drill. It may push me into early retirement.

The last straw (of many last straws) was over the weekend a co-worker sent me a chat "hey can you click approve on this PR real quick?". This only makes me click "Apply" (jobs) instead of "Approve".

I've been clicking apply myself, but only have had a few interviews. It's bad out there. I've been working since the late 90's and this is the worst job market I've seen in decades.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#723

Post by Viliam1234 »

EFreethought wrote: post #187
autumnstwilight wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had an encounter with the opposite problem the other day, PM asked me if the library I was using for randomization was "secure" and I said, "Yes, I used the standard Java library for cryptographically secure random numbers that is already used in several other locations in this project," and he said, "But did you ask Claude if it's secure? It has to be secure!"

Asking someone to ask an LLM is peak laziness.

Developers talk to LLMs.

Managers tell the developers to talk to LLMs.

CEOs tell the managers to tell the developers to talk to LLMs.

The longer the chain, the higher you are in the company hierarchy.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#724

Post by joquarky »

yourapostasy wrote: post #359
ffsm8 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

When some people call this "Verification Debt" or something similar, that is setting the Overton Window upon this phenomena adversely upon the verifiers. I call it an application of Brandolini's Law: "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it."" Until you put in at least the same amount of energy required to verify the AI output as you are asking oth…

From the other side, Brandolini's Law is also useful for exhausting control freaks.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#725

Post by joquarky »

autumnstwilight wrote: post #67
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…

I had an encounter with the opposite problem the other day, PM asked me if the library I was using for randomization was "secure" and I said, "Yes, I used the standard Java library for cryptographically secure random numbers that is already used in several other locations in this project," and he said, "But did you ask Claude if it's secure? It has to be secure!"

Have your agent write a report on why it is secure, have it compare with other methodologies, pros and cons tables, and anything else you can pad out a few dozen pages, then ask the PM to review it and choose which method to follow before you proceed.

Repeat for all instances of micromanagement until they learn to trust your judgement and expertise.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#726

Post by jussy »

The bottleneck in software used to be writing the code. Now the bottleneck shifted to whether (and how) to build the feature/product/thing (upstream validation) and whether to ship it (downstream quality/review).

Why aren't we seeing these type of articles talking about the first bottleneck? Even the ones talking about code review don't mention the upstream work.

Writing software is still one of the most expensive things you can do to a business even with LLms.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#727

Post by joquarky »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #291
jasonkester wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just can’t understand why this is not a fireable offense. Like, I can see getting a strong warning the first time somebody notices you do this, then if you persist you’d have to be let go. Just like anybody else who is clearly not doing their job. Why would you tolerate this sort of behavior at your company?

I get it’s annoying and I personally hate it but firing someone for it is ridiculous. Are you expecting everyone to rewrite everything from an AI before they share it because that doesn’t sound a good use of company time either.

There are likely hundreds of competent people who don't need AI and who ready and eager to take their place.

Why NOT fire them?

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#728

Post by joquarky »

bigfishrunning wrote: post #457
eddythompson80 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

So, in other words, the pipeline that's producing engineers is not filtering out people without talent. It used to be that people who "didn't know how to learn" couldn't make it through the early engineering courses and moved over to some other field.

Competency is no longer relevant to getting a job.

HR likes tech bros who know how to play the game. They hate nerds who point out risks.

This all started with the cryptocurrency gold rush.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#729

Post by confidantlake »

fennecfoxy wrote: post #389
jasonkester wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just can’t understand why this is not a fireable offense. Like, I can see getting a strong warning the first time somebody notices you do this, then if you persist you’d have to be let go. Just like anybody else who is clearly not doing their job. Why would you tolerate this sort of behavior at your company?

Because it's harder to fire managers. And even harder to fire executives. Who goes when companies need to downsize? Rarely executives; they'll always find a way to be retained...hell, they're the ones with the power to decide who goes.

We've investigated ourselves and decided we are absolutely essential. In fact we deserve a raise for safely guiding the company during these uncertain times.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#730

Post by bigfishrunning »

fn-mote wrote: post #719
xyproto wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some skills are easy re-pick-uppable, like bicycling. Mathematics is probably more challenging. Not sure about programming, especially "borint" business-like programming.

Nah. After you have those skills, they don’t go away. Math: the most important stuff is the biggest picture. If you learned it properly (not just memorizing), that’s the last to fade. With programming, the details change but the fundamental skill doesn’t. Or hadn’t as of a few years ago.

Does that really matter though if people aren't using the skills, and are just copying and pasting slop?
Post reply on HN