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

AI;DR (AI; Didn't Read)

rickmanelius.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 729 posts

Re: AI;DR (AI; Didn't Read)

#111

Post by rfgplk »

LPisGood wrote: post #56

My coworkers continue to dump hundreds of lines of AI documentation in every PR and every other line of code has between one and ten lines of AI generated comments, talking about the real unlock and how things are byte for byte identical on the load bearing path or how the acceptance ladder is misleading. Features are coming out and metrics are improving, but we’re basically in a post readability code base, with the…

Prune the comments? Instruct the LLM to print less comments (this one is genuinely hard though). What's really happening is that you don't have a strong enough review process (or a code standards process) to offset this. The one issue I see with this is that your team is almost certainly _NOT_ doing any kind of code review (especially if they're leaving comments like that). The other problem is that excessive comments actually harm LLM output, I've done tons of A/B testing, and pruning comments actually helps LLMs spot bugs, among other things.

Re: AI;DR (AI; Didn't Read)

#112

Post by xboxnolifes »

ademup wrote: post #22

I'll probably be downvoted to the bottom of the ocean, but I feel this needs to be said: - Why does it matter who or what wrote a thing? And how would you know if the /content/ is worthwhile, unless you read it... - The ability to "detect AI" is imperfect at best. 90% AI written? 5%? How would you know, unless you read it.... - If you didn't read it, then why brag about it with an "AI;DR"? - If you are wrong, and you…

> If you didn't read it, then why brag about it with an "AI;DR"?

It's a reference to TL;DR. If you can understand that, you can understand AI;DR.

Re: AI;DR (AI; Didn't Read)

#113

Post by noman-land »

LPisGood wrote: post #56

My coworkers continue to dump hundreds of lines of AI documentation in every PR and every other line of code has between one and ten lines of AI generated comments, talking about the real unlock and how things are byte for byte identical on the load bearing path or how the acceptance ladder is misleading. Features are coming out and metrics are improving, but we’re basically in a post readability code base, with the…

Have you considered talking about it? You're in a professional environment collectively working in a new way with a group of people. It's up to somebody to have opinions about what does and doesn't suck. If you silently go along and don't say anything you're dooming yourself and all of us to a lifetime of this garbage.

Re: AI;DR (AI; Didn't Read)

#114

Post by rfgplk »

moltar wrote: post #80
LPisGood wrote: post #56

My coworkers continue to dump hundreds of lines of AI documentation in every PR and every other line of code has between one and ten lines of AI generated comments, talking about the real unlock and how things are byte for byte identical on the load bearing path or how the acceptance ladder is misleading. Features are coming out and metrics are improving, but we’re basically in a post readability code base, with the…

I address it with AI. Write REVIEW.md. I have CC check itself pretty well. I also put into agent/claude/review instructions to write using simple English skill and humanizer skill. Then not to write redundant comments. It’s not perfect but definitely catches lots of slop.

It's actually insanely difficult to get LLMs not to produce comments. Even with explicit "NEVER LEAVE ANY COMMENTS WHATSOEVER", they still do, across basically all providers.

Re: AI;DR (AI; Didn't Read)

#115

Post by whstl »

LPisGood wrote: post #88
whstl wrote: post #25

There is a light at the end of the tunnel for all the minds burned out by AI slop. I already saw someone getting fired for only producing AI text as part of their entire output, after being unable to explain what they “wrote” in multiple situations. And recently my company enacted a mandate that text made for humans should not be AI generated. Sooner or later every company will start realizing that this is just peopl…

This makes me happy to hear that someone got fired for that, but I just cannot picture that happening at my organization. Perhaps standards are too low. What sort of thing did they get fired for? Was there some warning etc?

Product Manager using Jira AI to hallucinate tickets, epics, metrics and roadmap. Even the numbers were completely made up.

There were too many incidents of “this doesn’t look right” in the same week, so when their boss did a thorough check a couple days after, it was all fake, everything. Eventually they admitted and got canned.

Re: AI;DR (AI; Didn't Read)

#116

Post by giancarlostoro »

LPisGood wrote: post #56

My coworkers continue to dump hundreds of lines of AI documentation in every PR and every other line of code has between one and ten lines of AI generated comments, talking about the real unlock and how things are byte for byte identical on the load bearing path or how the acceptance ladder is misleading. Features are coming out and metrics are improving, but we’re basically in a post readability code base, with the…

Honestly, if you saved a ton of hours with the model coding for you, at least give me 30 minutes of your own words, show me you know what you're shipping, if you can't do that, then I don't know if I want to approve the PR. My first job we always did peer review in a meeting room when a PR looked a little too much, you can't exactly bring in GPT into a meeting so its a good time to ask simple questions about the change to ensure you understand it just as much as they do.

Re: AI;DR (AI; Didn't Read)

#118

Post by xboxnolifes »

ademup wrote: post #22

I'll probably be downvoted to the bottom of the ocean, but I feel this needs to be said: - Why does it matter who or what wrote a thing? And how would you know if the /content/ is worthwhile, unless you read it... - The ability to "detect AI" is imperfect at best. 90% AI written? 5%? How would you know, unless you read it.... - If you didn't read it, then why brag about it with an "AI;DR"? - If you are wrong, and you…

[flagged]

Re: AI;DR (AI; Didn't Read)

#119

Post by supermatt »

ademup wrote: post #22

I'll probably be downvoted to the bottom of the ocean, but I feel this needs to be said: - Why does it matter who or what wrote a thing? And how would you know if the /content/ is worthwhile, unless you read it... - The ability to "detect AI" is imperfect at best. 90% AI written? 5%? How would you know, unless you read it.... - If you didn't read it, then why brag about it with an "AI;DR"? - If you are wrong, and you…

The problem is that some people think all AI-assisted writing is prompting "write me a post about X", so they see LLM prose and assume there has been no thought or effort put into it.

Re: AI;DR (AI; Didn't Read)

#120

Post by otterley »

venzaspa wrote: post #104
gortok wrote: post #36

The part that astonishes me is that in the year of our common era two thousand twenty-six that it's not universally offensive and reviling to post an AI-generated response to another person. If I'm reading something on the internet, I'm either reading it to learn, or I'm reading it to be persuaded. If I wanted the LLM to teach me (thank you, no), I would ask an LLM. I'm reading your website/newsletter/email because I…

People are posting on this very website and commenting on Reddit using AI. I can't get myself into the headspace that would enable this behaviour. What exactly is the point of not engaging in conversation yourself and getting a bot to post it for you on an free platform. Crazy.

The HN Guidelines explicitly forbid posting AI-generated comments; they will be deleted if detected or reported.

I'd like them to go further and delete links to AI-generated content, but I haven't been able to persuade management to do that yet.

Post reply on HN