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

Don't paste the AI, please

dontpastetheai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 632 posts

Re: Don't paste the AI, please

#431

Post by cesnja »

I beg to differ. I'll often do a short LLM session to figure out an issue and will use my existing knowledge and experience to drive the LLM towards some solution. When the answer seems legit enough, I'll copy it back to the one asking.

It's not that different to what we were doing back in the day when search engines were still useful. I often wound up replying with a link either to a stackoverflow question or a blog post. There was still a knowledge/experience component involved in evaluating if the proposed solution fits the original question.

Re: Don't paste the AI, please

#432

Post by joshred »

throwaway98797 wrote: post #429
setgree wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get questions about academic papers I've written from non-academics sometimes. It's fun, I like that people are reading. However, some of them are clearly written by AI. I typically answer anyway, but on my most recent, I appended at the end: > P.S. I intuit, and Pangram agrees, that this last email was AI-generated (and apparently so was the first one, now that I checked). As general career advice, I wish to obser…

it’s passive aggressive. ultimately it’s better to not inform and start ignoring these people. let natural selection work.

What's passive about it?

Re: Don't paste the AI, please

#433

Post by throwaway98797 »

andy99 wrote: post #391
john_strinlai wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is true 100% I would even say: "Never reply on anything instantly that is not an absolute emergency, ever" you can shorten this to "never reply instantly", because an "absolute emergency" will never be communicated by email.

What is the problem with replying instantly? If you can give a reply immediately why wouldn’t you? If it’s low priority work that takes time, sure, but a typical yes/no, I’m available at 5, whatever, why not just send it? If you’ve already read the email it’s less efficient to come back to it later

it encourages back and forth.

it trains people to expect things.

boundaries.

Re: Don't paste the AI, please

#434

Post by darkstarsys »

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #344
Forgeties79 wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what’s the equivalent of “google it yourself” these days? Do you actually say that to people? Edit: i’ve hit the comment limit per given time, but all I have to say is “what have you found so far?” And “Google it yourself” are radically different responses man. The former is far more reasonable, it shows you are willing to be helpful and is a productive question. The other is just rude and implies your time is too…

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=do+people+say+google+it+yourself Thanks for reminding me of lmgtfy. We used to say that all the time 20 years ago, and it was way politer than how the people older than us spoke. It took some getting used to, but I really miss the hilariously mean bluntness of the IT/tech world. In retrospect, I think it was just a bunch of people who grew up breathing in leaded gas fumes, with undiagnosed menta…

Yeah, came here to see if anyone still remembers lmgtfy. Back to the future, I guess!

Re: Don't paste the AI, please

#435

Post by duskdozer »

m3kw9 wrote: post #389
jillesvangurp wrote: post #308

The complaint here is about lazy answers. But what about all the lazy questions? What's the equivalent of "Google it yourself" these days? When you ask something of somebody, the expectation of the other side to drop everything and do work for you isn't always appropriate/balanced/appreciated. The underlying problem here is that communication is hard; especially if it's not face to face. People can't read your mind o…

Most times if we just google it, we'd have no conversation. Human interaction over.

And? Why is a conversation needed?

Re: Don't paste the AI, please

#436

Post by jeltz »

throwaway98797 wrote: post #429
setgree wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get questions about academic papers I've written from non-academics sometimes. It's fun, I like that people are reading. However, some of them are clearly written by AI. I typically answer anyway, but on my most recent, I appended at the end: > P.S. I intuit, and Pangram agrees, that this last email was AI-generated (and apparently so was the first one, now that I checked). As general career advice, I wish to obser…

it’s passive aggressive. ultimately it’s better to not inform and start ignoring these people. let natural selection work.

Yeah, I have started ignoring AI generated stuff.

Re: Don't paste the AI, please

#437

Post by je42 »

coldtea wrote: post #145
je42 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, being quite "dyslectic" - LLM generated sentences have the advantage of being spelled correctly and being grammartically correct. I rather prefer iterating over LLM text than writing it by myself. Example: Typing this simple text above by myself was not straight forward.

Write yourself and tell the AI: "Fix the spelling and grammar. Do not change the structure or meaning" then.

Sure. For small changes it would work. However, for larger documents the effort increases a lot. LLM speeds things like "making use of terminolgy" in the document consitent. Restructuring, combine parapgraphs etc. a lot faster.

In the old days it would take me weeks to get a good document out of door. Now a it is days. While the absolute number of iterations polishing is higher.

Re: Don't paste the AI, please

#440

Post by fHr »

sometimes I get asked stupid shit they can figure themself really so in quotes I do like "This is what gpt-6 luna gave me:" [quote]then in quote the almost full AI answer.[quote end]
Post reply on HN