We need a dontpastethedontpastetheai.com to get ahead of this.
Don't paste the AI, please
251–260 of 632 posts
Re: Don't paste the AI, please
#252AI;DR This is the broader symptom of a global toxic corporate culture. We are afraid that one badly phrased message can hurt our reputation or even our jobs, so optimizing every message with softer wording, more political correctness, less directness is safer. But the real problem is the culture underneath it. If people are constantly worried about how every sentence will be interpreted, eventually they stop speaking…
Re: Don't paste the AI, please
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just want to say, "Copying and pasting Claude responses into Slack or an email directly shifts the burden of comprehension and understanding to everyone else" is something that I don't think I really internalized until you wrote it in that way. Which I think is evidence of what you are talking about.
Tangentially I also hate if someone answers with a voice message. I can understand that there are situations where you just can't type out the answer and those exceptions are of course fine, but if you post a voice message or god forbid a video message in a group chat you are forcing everyone to take the time and sit through it.
To the semi-literate a few paragraphs of text represent a significant investment of their time.
Re: Don't paste the AI, please
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you quite realize the implications of what you're saying. Surely you don't actually believe, or even desire, for everyone to fully understand everything that they say... No room for questions, uncertainty, bewilderment, etc? If someone is feigning competence via AI, that's the problem. Not Ai. If they use Ai to polish a communication, be it statement, question, etc, and they do it in a thoughtful manner…
> Surely you don't actually believe, or even desire, for everyone to fully understand everything that they say... No room for questions, uncertainty, bewilderment, etc? Nothing they said implies that. What they said is they want the understanding of the person to be revealed in the communication. Not masked via AI. > If they use Ai to polish a communication, be it statement, question, etc, and they do it in a thought…
It doesn't say the (level of) understanding of the person, but that they understand the idea. They might have misspoken, but they already replied to that comment and didn't object to my framing or further clarify.
> Yes, if that ever happens in the real world, it would be ok.
Well, this entire thread is me saying this happens in the real world, and people objecting to it
Re: Don't paste the AI, please
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if I could wrangle Claude into communicating exactly as I would have, the practical difference is of course not observable. But that's never happened, and I've had an enterprise license at work for years. Sorry to say, but this is a skill issue (and not necessarily with using Ai). I've used Ai MANY times to help SIGNIFICANTLY improve things that I've written - from a few sentences to many paragraphs. As I've said i…
Your writing tendencies must be quite bad if Claude's tendencies are an improvement. Isn't writing a skill issue?
Re: Don't paste the AI, please
#256AI;DR This is the broader symptom of a global toxic corporate culture. We are afraid that one badly phrased message can hurt our reputation or even our jobs, so optimizing every message with softer wording, more political correctness, less directness is safer. But the real problem is the culture underneath it. If people are constantly worried about how every sentence will be interpreted, eventually they stop speaking…
Re: Don't paste the AI, please
#257My reaction was of immediate visceral disgust.
I can say in no uncertain terms that I do not care if your English is completely broken. I prefer that over AI slop. You will not improve your writing and language proficiency if you do not practice them! If you do not care about your language proficiency then you have zero business doing offshored work.
The answer was also wrong. I pointed Claude to the micro service repo in question and asked it myself. Got a different but correct answer, after verifying it myself.
Their code is so trash I wonder if we’re even using the same models. Every PR I need to go over it myself and have Claude refactor and restructure everything. Claude generates decent code that can be made great with just a few iterations. I don’t even think these guys are running the code to test it, let alone read it. Just slop and ship.
Can’t rely on them to understand the code or even answer simple questions about it.
What is even the point of all this?! AI has made me personally more productive but overall it’s still a net negative because when you’re a “-x dev” the force multiplier from AI is overwhelming and soul crushing to everyone around you.
Re: Don't paste the AI, please
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if I could wrangle Claude into communicating exactly as I would have, the practical difference is of course not observable. But that's never happened, and I've had an enterprise license at work for years. Sorry to say, but this is a skill issue (and not necessarily with using Ai). I've used Ai MANY times to help SIGNIFICANTLY improve things that I've written - from a few sentences to many paragraphs. As I've said i…
> Sorry to say, but this is a skill issue That's the same slop response as "it's a skill issue" applied to C codebases being inherently insecure due to the language's footguns/design.
Re: Don't paste the AI, please
#259Re: Don't paste the AI, please
#260This is just demonstrably false. It often IS very helpful. It's annoying that people continue to ask basic factual questions without taking easy steps to solve the problem themselves. I can't remember the last time I "asked someone a question" that it was possible to figure out for myself.
It's the people who keep asking basic, easily researched questions and then wait for you to explain it to them, without first trying to resolve it on their own, that are being anti social, not the people trying to help them.
This is much the same as when Google was relatively new, and people hadn't adapted to it yet. I would get asked questions constantly like "what is the name of the class that does X" and since I usually try not to be too much of a jerk, I would often stop and go open a source file or look in the docs for the person. I know there is a class, and I think I remember what it's called, but I need to go double check it. That usually meant googling for the docs, clicking the first result, and sending them that link along with the specific answer. Sometimes when they asked me I was frustrated about something else or just in a bad mood, and I would tell them to f**g google it, I am not their research assistant.
Ignoring AI is the same scenario as ignoring Google but worse. I am not your research assistant, and worse, there is an artificial research assistant standing by 24/7. If I have to paste something in AI and paste the result back to you I am not the asshole in this situation. If you go do the work to check yourself and it's not something you can just verify conclusively and you need to be sure it's not the AI fooling you, then I am more than happy to look at what you have and lend any expertise I can add to the situation.