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

Your intellectual fly is open when you use an LLM to author a post (2025)

bcantrill.dtrace.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 458 posts

Re: Your intellectual fly is open when you use an LLM to author a post (2025)

#241

Post by cozzyd »

a2ff6eeb0 wrote: post #194
prisonguard wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You and the AI agree, but how about you and the team who will eventually read and do code review. Cognitive burden increases marginally with AI assisted coding. This is why we haven't seen big projects(think browsers and browser engines) spawning in the past year.

> but how about you and the team who will eventually read and do code review. Why are you reviewing AI code in detail? Do you also review the assembly output of GCC line by line?

For instructions you really care about, yes of course you review the assembly output! Usually when you're doing SIMD or want to check atomics are doing what you expect.

Re: Your intellectual fly is open when you use an LLM to author a post (2025)

#242

Post by CamperBob2 »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #233
CamperBob2 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still write code, I just write it in English now. It's still rock and roll to me.

That... isn't writing code.

Sigh.

It's like watching somebody about to be hit by a bus. You yell, you wave your arms, but they either don't hear you, or they don't believe you. The last thing that goes through their head is a Greyhound's hood ornament.

Re: Your intellectual fly is open when you use an LLM to author a post (2025)

#243

Post by jeremyjh »

a2ff6eeb0 wrote: post #227
jeremyjh wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the meantime, they aren't capable of doing it, and neither are humans who never understand the code.

So, you believe that Sam Altman understands the code?

No, but he also doesn't steer technical architecture & engineering, does he?

Re: Your intellectual fly is open when you use an LLM to author a post (2025)

#244

Post by jeremyjh »

27183 wrote: post #214
jeremyjh wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Test code for a new bug is a good example. You can prove the test covers the bug without understanding the test code (you need to understand the bug, of course). There are some domains/tests where you can't do that - you need to be sure its failing for the right reason, but often you can do that without understanding every line of the test code. You can extend this to lots of related test infrastructure. If you can w…

> You can prove the test covers the bug without understanding the test code (you need to understand the bug, of course). I'm not following.. When we write regression tests those tests encode invariants we expect to be maintained under source code transformations over time. If I don't understand the test code I've written, how can I know which invariants I've imposed? That's why, broadly speaking, we write test code t…

You can know the test is likely good, if it reproduces the failure you are fixing. I don't think we're communicating though because I never said the test code was undecipherable.

Re: Your intellectual fly is open when you use an LLM to author a post (2025)

#245

Post by [deleted] »

27183 wrote: post #214
jeremyjh wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Test code for a new bug is a good example. You can prove the test covers the bug without understanding the test code (you need to understand the bug, of course). There are some domains/tests where you can't do that - you need to be sure its failing for the right reason, but often you can do that without understanding every line of the test code. You can extend this to lots of related test infrastructure. If you can w…

> You can prove the test covers the bug without understanding the test code (you need to understand the bug, of course). I'm not following.. When we write regression tests those tests encode invariants we expect to be maintained under source code transformations over time. If I don't understand the test code I've written, how can I know which invariants I've imposed? That's why, broadly speaking, we write test code t…

[deleted]

Re: Your intellectual fly is open when you use an LLM to author a post (2025)

#246

Post by CityOfThrowaway »

lelanthran wrote: post #207
bcherny wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(I work at Anthropic) I agree. I use an LLM to write my code, but I do all of my writing by hand, since it helps me think. It reminds me of the transition over the last year from AI-assisted coding to AI doing all the coding. At first the code output wasn't good enough, and humans read and iterated on the code all day, so the details of the source code mattered. Now, the code is largely high quality and it meets a la…

> wonder if long form writing will go the way of code. You and the AI agree on an outline or other high level representation, then the LLM expands it into a document. What use is that? I'm not being facetious, I'd really rather like to know. Who or what is the audience for that sort of long form writing? If it's a human, why would they read it? They'd just give it to an LLM and get the salient points back. If the aud…

You can imagine:

1. I have a bunch of data or research that I've gathered with a unique hypothesis

2. Having gotten my arms around that pile of information, I believe I have a compelling thesis to put forth

3. I design the narrative arc and of the thesis. The important parts, the necessary but not sufficient scaffolding.

4. An AI helps fill in the story from there. Fact checks each claim, connects the dots, makes it comprehensible.

Who is this for? Well, quite possibly the human who asked for it. It's pretty informative to read back a research brief in full that you helped do the scaffolding.

Also of very clear use is other AI's who did not have the same unique hypothesis and did not gather the supporting evidence. It's an interesting angle for others to build on.

And of course, other humans! Most human written content gets almost zero readers today as it is. And I suppose LLM content probably pulls the asymptote closer to zero, but some pieces of content may be genuinely interesting or useful.

Re: Your intellectual fly is open when you use an LLM to author a post (2025)

#247

Post by throwaway613746 »

dynm wrote: post #14

I'm a bit skeptical of arguments of the form, "You should not use LLMs without disclosure because LLMs at bad at writing." My reasoning is: If LLMs get better at writing—which I think is extremely likely—will you switch positions and say that now using LLMs without disclosure is A-OK? Surely some people are willing to bite that bullet and say yes. But for most people, my guess is that the answer will remain no. Thus,…

[dead]

Re: Your intellectual fly is open when you use an LLM to author a post (2025)

#248

Post by SecretDreams »

anon84873628 wrote: post #129
SecretDreams wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. LLMs for writing is like intellectual catfishing. You are presenting yourself one way in written form.. but that's not who you will ever be once someone has to actually have a conversation with you. And that's wrong.

Wow, you must be one very unique and special person if you converse the way you write. By definition, a carefully written and edited piece will be much more refined and cogent than an extemporaneous conversation. Just watch an interview with a famous author. Or compare a legal brief to what court actually sounds like.

I've engaged with people at work where they led with an LLM via slack before I connected with them on a call. It's quite jarring and disappointing to see the gap in cohesion and knowledge going from one form of communication to the other.

If you're using an LLM to tidy something up, that's one thing. If the LLM is your voice and is supplanting your knowledge, I might as well cut you out and talk to the LLM directly.

Jekill and Hyde vibes

Re: Your intellectual fly is open when you use an LLM to author a post (2025)

#249

Post by instinct007 »

I struggle with this. I think people just will not want to read what LLMs output, plus perhaps you can still analyze things better than an LLM, although that seems skeptical.

My situation is writing about futuristic long-term business strategy ideas; can that be replaced?

Is this unique at all - s-1.site

Re: Your intellectual fly is open when you use an LLM to author a post (2025)

#250

Post by vorticalbox »

bcherny wrote: post #166
jeremyjh wrote: post #62

These are all important points and I love the analogy. But there is an even bigger issue with having LLMs write for you: Writing is thinking. Thinking and deciding. There have been many times when I start out writing something substantial - could be an email, a blog post, a software design document, anything - when my own views substantially changed during the writing process. Writing forces you to serialize your tho…

(I work at Anthropic) I agree. I use an LLM to write my code, but I do all of my writing by hand, since it helps me think. It reminds me of the transition over the last year from AI-assisted coding to AI doing all the coding. At first the code output wasn't good enough, and humans read and iterated on the code all day, so the details of the source code mattered. Now, the code is largely high quality and it meets a la…

You could try this [0] I’ve started doing this and it’s helped a lot.

1. I understand fully the code and everything it does 2. You can pick up on mistakes super early and it can adjust the plan is it goes. 3. Faster than writing it by hand but slower than letting the LLM do it.

[0] https://ankursethi.com/blog/prevent-cognitive-debt-by-manual...

Post reply on HN