Live data from Hacker News

The Human Is the Loop

brentfitzgerald.com

71–80 of 101 posts

Re: The Human Is the Loop

#71
post #54

I am coming around to the view that for somethings it is better to not use AI at all. Writing and Strategic thought are those things for me. The problem with writing, and something I am noticing lately, is that AI robs your ability to create prose in your style. Even if you use AI just a little bit to touch up your writing - you start being influenced - And over time it adds up - you start writing like AI just a litt…

I've tried teaching AI to copy a writer's style and it fails miserably. And the output out of it always have the same writing style - LLMesque. I agree!

Re: The Human Is the Loop

#72
post #17

I like this, and resonate with the same thoughts. I do wonder when it comes to work though if the answer isn’t doing less but maybe breaking through in some way. I don’t know what it looks like but I do have the feeling LLMs are here to stay. Or maybe it’s just keeping them in the work box - if someone wants to pay me to use LLMs and generate code, so be it. But keeping them away from hobbies, plans, art. Noble maybe…

I'm not sure "keep AI out of hobbies" quite works either. With young kids, reducing the activation energy can be the difference between doing a project and never doing it at all.

If there's anyone who shouldn't be cognitively disengaging, it's young kids. The push to get kids using LLMs is to create permanently dependent future customers.

Re: The Human Is the Loop

#73
post #59
post #54

I am coming around to the view that for somethings it is better to not use AI at all. Writing and Strategic thought are those things for me. The problem with writing, and something I am noticing lately, is that AI robs your ability to create prose in your style. Even if you use AI just a little bit to touch up your writing - you start being influenced - And over time it adds up - you start writing like AI just a litt…

> The problem with writing, and something I am noticing lately, is that AI robs your ability to create prose in your style. Even if you use AI just a little bit to touch up your writing - you start being influenced - And over time it adds up - you start writing like AI just a little bit every now and then. It seems to be robbing me of my ability to create original prose. IMHO the fix is to read more books. Obviously…

That was always the fix, long before we had LLMs.

After a hiatus of a few years, when the internet had me, I've gone back to prioritising reading books once more. It's not only great for my writing, it's also just good for the soul. And it's the absolute antithesis of the infinite scroll.

Re: The Human Is the Loop

#74
post #54

I am coming around to the view that for somethings it is better to not use AI at all. Writing and Strategic thought are those things for me. The problem with writing, and something I am noticing lately, is that AI robs your ability to create prose in your style. Even if you use AI just a little bit to touch up your writing - you start being influenced - And over time it adds up - you start writing like AI just a litt…

[flagged]

> Prose? Don't care, I'm not writing literature, I'm delivering a message. If AI helps that be more clear and faster, great.

What you've probably just never noticed is that voice is a critical part of communication in written form just as much as in speech. And this is especially true when communicating in a crowded public environment like the internet.

Voice helps the receiver cohere your message as a distinct signal to pay attention to and draws it out from the noise of competing communication in their day, on their screen, etc. It helps them hear you -- and what you mean to say -- in your prose. It also gives the receiver subtle but meaningful insight into where you're thoughts are coming from culturally, experientially, and ideologically as your voice leaks that background information about you as subtext.

Because LLM's are a compression/decompression technology, letting you draw a lot of content out from a small leading prompt, they infill that output content with a voice that has characteristic and common phrasing, characteristic and common tics, characteristic and common structures, etc. So output from any given LLM, and from most LLM's trained in similar ways, ends up tending towards the same voice. i.e. they just to contribute to the noise.

It's deceptive, because your English teacher probably would grade their prose more highly than yours and so of course there's a part of you that thinks that's what you want. But impressing your English teacher is only part of communicating. The other part is making yourself heard.

LLM's make your prose easier to analyze or evaluate but much harder to hear.

Re: The Human Is the Loop

#75
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem with writing, and something I am noticing lately, is that AI robs your ability to create prose in your style. Even if you use AI just a little bit to touch up your writing - you start being influenced - And over time it adds up - you start writing like AI just a little bit every now and then. It seems to be robbing me of my ability to create original prose. IMHO the fix is to read more books. Obviously…

That was always the fix, long before we had LLMs. After a hiatus of a few years, when the internet had me, I've gone back to prioritising reading books once more. It's not only great for my writing, it's also just good for the soul. And it's the absolute antithesis of the infinite scroll.

"What you read and how deeply you read matters almost as much as how you love, work, exercise, vote, practice charity, strive for social justice, cultivate kindness and courtesy, worship if you are capable of worship. The mind is an activity and will decay into dark inertia if not sustained by the sustenance of reading.

The great poems, plays, novels, stories teach us how to go on living, even when submerged under forty fathoms of bother and distress. If you live ninety years you will be a battered survivor. Your own mistakes, accidents, failures at otherness beat you down. Rise up at dawn and read something that matters as soon as you can."

-- Harold Bloom

Re: The Human Is the Loop

#78
post #54

I am coming around to the view that for somethings it is better to not use AI at all. Writing and Strategic thought are those things for me. The problem with writing, and something I am noticing lately, is that AI robs your ability to create prose in your style. Even if you use AI just a little bit to touch up your writing - you start being influenced - And over time it adds up - you start writing like AI just a litt…

If i were to compare it to relying on SO for your code, then would SO be a better fit because its multiple people. Are models inherently worse than a human community? maybe my question is too generic to answet

Re: The Human Is the Loop

#79
post #54

I am coming around to the view that for somethings it is better to not use AI at all. Writing and Strategic thought are those things for me. The problem with writing, and something I am noticing lately, is that AI robs your ability to create prose in your style. Even if you use AI just a little bit to touch up your writing - you start being influenced - And over time it adds up - you start writing like AI just a litt…

[flagged]

Your prompt is clearer and faster to read than the fluffed out 10x longer version spat out by the machine

Re: The Human Is the Loop

#80
post #13

I find it interesting that so many of my friends resonate with this. I… don’t, really. I only ever have 2-4 opencode/claude tabs open at once. And I use them for consistent tasks. There’s no way I’d be able to keep track otherwise. I have an “email reviewer” terminal, and a “doc maker” terminal, and 1-2 “coding” terminals. But I don’t start a half dozen things simultaneously (which is ironic, because I have ADHD). I…

> 1) when I’m directly working on something, I don’t want to leave it. I’m hyperfocused on it. But that’s true even without AI; I would have been obsessed with building doughflow.app were it for AI or not. The difference is I may never have finished it without Ai.

Funnily enough this is my biggest problem when using AI. The time it spends "thinking" is time I'm more likely to get distracted and switch to another window.

And I use the term thinking liberally, because a lot of the time it's just wasting time. Sometimes I ask it to edit a file, it does, and then it thinks for 2 or 3 minutes afterwards. During that time I've verified the edit, committed it, opened a pull request and sometimes even merged before it finishes thinking about that edit. What was it thinking about during that time?

Post reply on HN