[dead]
Don't be a meat proxy
741–750 of 786 posts
Re: Don't be a meat proxy
#742Earlier quoted context omitted.
Different roles and specialties? Different work history?
So, you have different roles and specialties, but you know for a fact that this person should know the answer to your question. I think we're speaking past each other, because this doesn't make sense to me. I don't presume that someone will have an answer I'm looking for. I'm pleased when they do, but often I just get breadcrumbs, and I have to solve the puzzle for myself.
I'm not GP, but in research very diverse teams are not uncommon. I'm on a team now in which I'm the embedded software engineer / Android SME and my coworker is the 4G LTE/5G NR SME.
I ask him 4G LTE/5G NR questions all the time. I don't know ahead of time if he'll know the answer, but (1) it'd be a solid bet that he does and (2) it's his responsibility to know it given his role.
Re: Don't be a meat proxy
#743Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I've been asked to confirm that our random number generator satisfies section 14 of the Foo-Bar Accord of 2021. I'm fairly certain it does, and that foorandom.c is a good choice. Assuming I'm broadly correct, write one short paragraph that would confidently assuage anyone of concern without raising any new concerns. Cite the specification and link to it. Afterwards, for my benefit, write a short bullet list with any…
In that case a better answer would be "I'm fairly certain it does satisfy it, but in any case I asked Claude to double check for any issues and it didn't find any unsatisfied requirement". That's the information that matters, and it's probably faster anyways.
Sure, but if I'm going to prompt an AI anyway, I might as well ask it to write a convincing paragraph too.
Re: Don't be a meat proxy
#744Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I've asked *you* a question, it's because I want to know what *you* think. I don't want to know what Claude thinks. If you don't know the answer, say that. "I don't know" is a perfectly good answer, albeit one which I might follow up with something like "Well why don't you know? This is literally your job to know", which is kind of what 90% of my emails at work for the past three weeks have been.
Out of interest, do you pay people extremely well to work with you?
No, but it's a good question. I don't pay people, people pay me a hell of a lot of money to fix their problems, and I'm very very busy.
Re: Don't be a meat proxy
#745Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even Mythos can hallucinate[1] with a codebase to analyze. The argument I often see is that humans are fallible, too, but the issues we're seeing in this topic are about those who should know better—including in senior positions—heeding LLM responses/advice over human and concerningly not actually thinking about things at all. Ie: they're not being treated by many as just useful tools/tentative feedback but as author…
That's a bad example: it did not hallucinate about the codebase (which it had access to), but about a rule outside the codebase (which is not in the context, I assume). Yeah, missing requirements can cause it to rely on things it thinks are true. Same as humans do all the time when they lack context.
Christ, no, humans dont makr the same mistakes. And even mire importantly, those who do similar ones, end up not being trusted.
We dont have such a campaign around people as there is about ai.
Re: Don't be a meat proxy
#746In my life, the bigger issue are people who are not asking Claude, but asking me. Because it would take 15 minutes to find out the answer myself, and 3 minutes to let Claude find it, I ask Claude. So how should I answer? Should I disclose that I used Claude to find the answer? Or should I act like I did it myself, appearing to have super-powers that I don't possess?
Just say "I dont know". Christ. You people are unbelievable. How isbthat an issue?
Re: Don't be a meat proxy
#747Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depending on speed of course. At some speeds drag will cause significantly more work.
… I dunno. Bikes aren't just efficient, they're the most efficient form of human movement. 60 W gets you 3 mph walking or 9 mph biking. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_performance On my own bike, I don't think there is a pace that isn't easier. Even at slow speeds, it's not a whole lot of work. (And you can always change to a gear where it just isn't a lot of work to go slow. The challenge is more remaining upr…
Who cycles at less than 9mph? According to your link the average cycling speed in Copenhagen is 9.6mph so, according to your numbers, people are putting in more energy than they would with walking to go faster. Nobody cycles at walking speed because it saves energy.
Re: Don't be a meat proxy
#748Re: Don't be a meat proxy
#749As a side note: This is the most impressive page I have laid eyes on in a very long time. Nothing but calm and content. Beautiful!
Re: Don't be a meat proxy
#750I 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…
Had a senior exec pick up his phone, punch some words into AI, then as-it-was-generating-a-response flip it around and put it in front of me. This shit has progressed well past seriousness and into the absurd
will point my phone with an AI app back to process the output