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

I'm becoming AI-blind

cymerys.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 533 posts

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#51

Post by dofm »

deaton wrote: post #41
dofm wrote: post #5

Something that bothers me about AI generated content more broadly is how unmemorable it is. I don't mean as in bad . I mean literally, as in hard to remember or recall. Despite seeing a lot of them, I cannot think of one AI-generated photo that I can picture clearly in my mind; a few are partial but elusive. Whereas I can recall (visualise) a whole bunch of traditional photographs. The same is true of AI generated te…

Yeah, its really weird. Maybe its a cognitive bias that says "an AI made this, so it isn't important," but I can remember perfectly the events of a book I read 10 years ago, and a book I read 1 year ago, and another I finished 2 months ago. Meanwhile I can't remember what claude told me yesterday.

I think it is because they are on some latent level cognitively uniform and unchanging.

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#52

Post by dsign »

I don't like AI-generated text at work, at all. It feels lifeless and unfocused.

But what I hate the most is that it is objectively better than what I had before. No typos, clear structure, and, regrettably, the verbosity and autistic obsession with detail of the LLM is more actionable and useful than the human guy who wrote lists of commands and URLs as documentation, without explaining anything. Or the colleague who writes in uppercase and with question marks and who doesn't make any sense and forces me to engage in an interrogation effort to get to the bottom of what they are trying to say. Or the colleague who simply hates writing--despite being decent at it--and will call you to give you a meandering verbal explanation that lasts two hours of what they want from you. The cynic in me bemoans that we brought this upon ourselves, in more than one way.

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#53

Post by Flamkuchlo »

causal wrote: post #30

There's some psychological mechanism by which my brain immediately recognizes AI generated text and just short-circuits to "there is no information here". And when I force myself to read AI-generated text I realize I'm making my brain do creative work to impart meaning to the words. It is exhausting because my brain is literally trying to do a just-in-time rewrite of the text into something valuable. Something is dee…

Are you sure you are not doing the same thing with other texts?

I started to skim a lot more text due to me having read a lot. Like in news article, i stoped reading the first paragraph because it repeats just what it was already written in the short subtext. Then there is the second paragarph which is used to have some historical view or whatever it is.

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#54

Post by SquibblesRedux »

chasd00 wrote: post #40
causal wrote: post #30

There's some psychological mechanism by which my brain immediately recognizes AI generated text and just short-circuits to "there is no information here". And when I force myself to read AI-generated text I realize I'm making my brain do creative work to impart meaning to the words. It is exhausting because my brain is literally trying to do a just-in-time rewrite of the text into something valuable. Something is dee…

> Something is deeply wrong with AI generated output It works just fine for me.

You are absolutely right.

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#55

Post by iamacyborg »

rappatic wrote: post #6

Claude has become noticeably, painfully worse at writing in the last six months. At this point it’s practically useless for anything except code.

Reverting to Opus 4.6 is much better than later models, though that is still full of annoying tics as well.

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#58

Post by nozzlegear »

xnx wrote: post #47
causal wrote: post #30

There's some psychological mechanism by which my brain immediately recognizes AI generated text and just short-circuits to "there is no information here". And when I force myself to read AI-generated text I realize I'm making my brain do creative work to impart meaning to the words. It is exhausting because my brain is literally trying to do a just-in-time rewrite of the text into something valuable. Something is dee…

> my brain immediately recognizes AI generated text I bet it does. I bet it also recognizes some human text as AI text, and doesn't detect other AI text.

Show me AI text that manages to climb out of the uncanny valley, and I'll show you AI text that's been edited by a human.

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#59

Post by TalkingCodeMonk »

causal wrote: post #30

There's some psychological mechanism by which my brain immediately recognizes AI generated text and just short-circuits to "there is no information here". And when I force myself to read AI-generated text I realize I'm making my brain do creative work to impart meaning to the words. It is exhausting because my brain is literally trying to do a just-in-time rewrite of the text into something valuable. Something is dee…

The "something deeply wrong" part about AI, that even most technology enthusiasts evidently do not seem to grasp, is that it is still fundamentally a statistical model — an algorithmic construct — and does not possess any real intelligence or critical thought whatsoever.

No matter how much investors and tech companies want you to believe that they are on the verge of super intelligence, nothing I've seen to date can not easily be explained by "correlation engine", including the "novel" math solutions, all of which appear to just be "a composition of solutions humans have developed and documented elsewhere" upon deeper inspection.

Re: I'm becoming AI-blind

#60

Post by collinmcnulty »

dsign wrote: post #52

I don't like AI-generated text at work, at all. It feels lifeless and unfocused. But what I hate the most is that it is objectively better than what I had before. No typos, clear structure, and, regrettably, the verbosity and autistic obsession with detail of the LLM is more actionable and useful than the human guy who wrote lists of commands and URLs as documentation, without explaining anything. Or the colleague wh…

My concern is that even if the LLM can turn your colleague's bad writing into something more coherent and actionable, is that something actually what your colleague meant to convey? It could be clear and still detached from the reality of their intention, or they may not have even formed a clear intention. If the goal of writing is to convey what's in another human's brain, that goal is failed completely.
Post reply on HN