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

581–590 of 729 posts

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

#581

Post by account42 »

eudamoniac wrote: post #414
BeetleB wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bottleneck existed before LLMs. Amdahl's Law applies. Just because code can be produced 10x faster doesn't mean much if other parts of the flow can't be sped up. As I said here and elsewhere: If management is concerned code review is a bottleneck, let management be aware that the process has to change. Either the human is not as thorough, or he uses some combination of his brain + LLM to conduct the review. It's…

Management is not a logical formula. Management says all code must be reviewed, your coworkers are approving (rubber stamping) PRs 10x faster than you, why aren't you able to keep up? Why are you being difficult?

Management also doesn't have to be as simplistic as "more code faster = better" without any understanding of the consequences.

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

#583

Post by account42 »

Gigachad wrote: post #291
BeetleB wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a code review, right? Give feedback that about the docs and block merging till the issue is resolved.

You can't keep up with the slop. And before you finish a first pass read on the wall of diff, another AI sloperator on the team has hit approve and the PR is merged.

At that point maybe go looking for a company with a better work environment.

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

#584

Post by account42 »

kennyadam wrote: post #310
yoyohello13 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow! that comment you linked speaks to me. I was watching a review video for a game yesterday that was so obviously written by AI it was actually painful to listen to. I started reading the comments and there were several people praising this Youtuber on their great use of metaphor. Literally "subbed because you're such an amazing writer." It actually shook me to my core. If those were real people making those commen…

At least you didn’t over-react. Some people seem so afraid of consuming AI-generated content that they see it everywhere. A popular YouTuber says “thanks for the pushback” in a YouTube video and has the mob at his door, instantly, despite it not being written by AI. In the comments for any blog post or article that hits the HN front page, there is always someone confidently calling it out for being unmistakeably writ…

What's tiring is being spammed with AI slop every where. A strong counter reaction that may occasionally have false positives is only natural.

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

#585

Post by stAInley »

stronglikedan wrote: post #248
delecti wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the ocean, it's the poster's own team. A simple "AI comments suck" in a sprint retro would be trivially easy and would at least start the conversation.

Doesn't matter. You'll come off as the baddie. It's the foreseeable future. Best just to learn how to interpret AI generated shit, or learn how to run it through AI and have it translate it to a more concise format without all the buzzwords. It'll take getting used to, but it'll save your career.

This reply is not directed to you specifically, but that attitude is why improvement doesn't happen.

"My peers are all bad", "Management has no idea what's going on", "My boss is out of touch", "My staff keep screwing up".

But if you're consistently seeing the problems while everyone else becomes defensive, you (that think that way) need to learn how to communicate effectively in a way that doesn't result in being 'the baddie' and solve the interpersonal dynamic along with the technical problems. "Crucial Conversations" is a good place to start.

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

#586

Post by account42 »

xdennis wrote: post #321
cheschire wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What drives people to cheat at competitive games? I imagine it’s the same genes.

As a previous massive cheater in RPG games (when a was young and it was easy to write your own tools) the reason to cheat is because many games (especially RPGs) have bullshit mechanics. You have to perform a lot of repetitive stuff to get ahead. Cheating is seen as honorable because it's about getting back at a system which forces you into unfair circumstances (this is akin to corruption/graft in real life). In my o…

Do you mean MMORPGs or single-player RPGs. Because modifying a game or game state to your likes with the goal of improving your personal enjoyment of the game is very different compared to cheating to get ahead of other people.

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

#587

Post by account42 »

teo_zero wrote: post #513
jackjeff wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a world of difference between using AI as an editor vs letting it write a whole essay for you. AI;DR is about the latter.

> using AI as an editor vs letting it write a whole essay for you. AI;DR is about the latter I'm sure that's the intention, but the alarming trend, at least here on HN, is crying wolf at the first em-dash.

Why is that alarming? Your immune system will also do some small amount of collateral damage to your own cells when its in a heightened state.

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

#589

Post by fireflash38 »

LPisGood wrote: post #419
kristjansson wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the tests. Oh god the tests. Personal recent favorite: I asked for some changes to a Dockerfile, which it did ably, and then promptly tested by writing a pytest module that traversed up to the root, read the Dockerfile, and checked that the added lines were present.

I regret this but at some point I stopped reading generated tests. It feels pointless when our test files are already tens of thousands of lines of — at best — tautological slip which says that the codes does what it does.

I think reading and writing test code is harder than the underlying code itself. You must know both the desired behavior of the code-under-test and whether the test correctly stresses that behavior. And then if you're working on anything more complicated than a single unit test you must also make sure that it doesn't blow up anything adjacent to it (preserve state).

I think enforcing black box testing is the best way to get useful tests out of both humans and robots. They must not know the internals, or it will lead them to do bad things.

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

#590

Post by munksbeer »

atomicnumber3 wrote: post #486
noman-land wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No, if he speaks against it he gets labeled "anti-AI" and laid off or not promoted. If he stays silent he retains his job. Corporate Capitalism's main innovation was virtualizing feudalism. Now anyone with a bit of cash flow can be a feudal lord with peasants to do his will. No need to maintain land or fight over it with other feudal lords. There's still fighting, naturally, but now the game isn't zero sum. The serfs…

I was nodding to your post for a short period, then you just had to throw in the usual anti-capitalism zeitgeist rant.

Reframe your context, pretend you're in a communist society, and you could be making the exact same point about speaking up against the grain being bad for you. It feels as though people are brainwashed by anti-capitalism sentiment at the moment, unable to see outside of that context.

Post reply on HN