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

The Waymo effect: how AI is quietly making research less collaborative

researchagenda.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 308 posts

Re: The Waymo effect: how AI is quietly making research less collaborative

#291

Post by fidotron »

chunky1994 wrote: post #286
fidotron wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is valuable to ask questions about why things are the way they are in order to understand the fundamentals of it vs we should change these things because I am 'smarter than you' and I don't understand why things are done this way (which I called dumb, and not smart). But you expressed doubt of stated (and frankly not even remotely subjective) experience, so if we dropped you in an organisation your immediate res…

You seem to be imputing a lot of intent into my comment and then extending that to value judgements about smartness etc. I don't know what any of this has to do with what GP was saying. Yeah, there's a balance between questioning everything and questioning nothing, but there are a lot of bureaucratic things that happen in organizations and its generally a good thing to question certain things that don't have clear ex…

I see you don't understand the point, and you're doing that thing of imposing on me trying to help you understand it, which seems highly unlikely to work. Going back, again, to your quote:

> I doubt that someone smart (as you put it) would deliberately want things redone because they don't understand it

And yet that is quite simply exactly what I have seen multiple times in multiple organisations on multiple continents, but for some reason you "doubt" this because it doesn't fit what you think of as "smart behaviour" when spelled out like that, and then spend ages arguing that now there's no intent to this comment? Or any of the others . . .

I am going to do what I always end up doing in such situations, of just giving up and walking away, which every normal person does way earlier in proceedings. Ils sont fou ces physiciens.

Re: The Waymo effect: how AI is quietly making research less collaborative

#292

Post by Matumio »

PunchTornado wrote: post #153
wrsh07 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a truely bizarre claim. Imagine if one said: "Weather forecasts should be banned because they can never reach 100% accuracy"

Imagine writing an article in 5 days. Working hard. Posting it online and then everyone says it is ai and laughs and dismisses it because a tool says it is AI.

Like in this comic about art: https://www.peppercarrot.com/en/miniFantasyTheater/064.html

Re: The Waymo effect: how AI is quietly making research less collaborative

#293

Post by done_lurking »

teiferer wrote: post #196
meowface wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you check my comment history here, I have not written this before. I like LLMs and use them daily, but I don't really like when people use them undisclosed for long-form prose writing.

Me neither, but just running around accusing random folks of things is not going to help. To the contrary. If a real author doing real work with a lot of effort risks being accused of things they didn't do and just dismissed, you'll get less of genuine content, not more.

It does help, if the accusation is true. The fact that false accusations result in less genuine content implies that true accusations result in less disingenuous content. For better or for worse, social consequences do affect people's behavior on average.

Re: The Waymo effect: how AI is quietly making research less collaborative

#294

Post by chunky1994 »

fidotron wrote: post #291
chunky1994 wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be imputing a lot of intent into my comment and then extending that to value judgements about smartness etc. I don't know what any of this has to do with what GP was saying. Yeah, there's a balance between questioning everything and questioning nothing, but there are a lot of bureaucratic things that happen in organizations and its generally a good thing to question certain things that don't have clear ex…

I see you don't understand the point, and you're doing that thing of imposing on me trying to help you understand it, which seems highly unlikely to work. Going back, again, to your quote: > I doubt that someone smart (as you put it) would deliberately want things redone because they don't understand it And yet that is quite simply exactly what I have seen multiple times in multiple organisations on multiple continen…

Its clear that you are taking great offence to that particular quote and determined to misunderstand my point due to your pre-existing bias, despite my many attempts to clarify it, so let me finish the quote for you.

I doubt, that someone smart (as you put it) ..and not as GP put it..who..would deliberately want things redone because they don't understand it..are..the same people that GP is talking about when they say there are advantages to being "like this".

This is no longer fruitful, but I only hope that this thread might to be a reason to more charitable in your interpretation next time regarding such a discussion.

Re: The Waymo effect: how AI is quietly making research less collaborative

#295

Post by NichoPaolucci »

joe_the_user wrote: post #260
NichoPaolucci wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, oddly similar thing happened to me. Anecdotally, I was working with a non-developer. She was building a reporting dashboard with Claude. I pointed out that the system she built was using the filesystem to store one line notes about the report, and I said "I would probably tell the agent to use a database for that, but it's not the end of the world if it works". And she replied "Claude said the developer's right,…

I think I could qualify as an expert on various topics relative to many average people. But it always bothered me when experts wanted to "just be believed". In your example, it doesn't long to explain why a database is better than the file system in this instance and a moderately intelligent should be able to understand and not need you or Claude as the source of truth. So I think it can be good people are able to "A…

So, I did let her know that a storage volume was going to be more difficult to manage, could result in lost data, and would make the data harder to work with - I mentioned it's not the end of the world if it works, it was just a professional suggestion.

To me, there are different levels to "just being believed". If a mechanic tells you your car isn't working because you don't have an alternator, does that really need scrutiny? If you don't understand the subject matter, at some point you have to "just believe" someone else.

Especially for a non-technical user, trusting the software developers at your company on technical advice should be a given.

Re: The Waymo effect: how AI is quietly making research less collaborative

#296

Post by NichoPaolucci »

mitxela wrote: post #230
NichoPaolucci wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, oddly similar thing happened to me. Anecdotally, I was working with a non-developer. She was building a reporting dashboard with Claude. I pointed out that the system she built was using the filesystem to store one line notes about the report, and I said "I would probably tell the agent to use a database for that, but it's not the end of the world if it works". And she replied "Claude said the developer's right,…

Annoyingly pedantically speaking, a filesystem is a type of database.

God do I wish that was her response to my suggestion.

"Fair enough - go nuts. Let me know when Claude tells you to transition to Postgres because I'll need to get you access credentials"

Re: The Waymo effect: how AI is quietly making research less collaborative

#297

Post by mikepurvis »

NichoPaolucci wrote: post #288
mikepurvis wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see how the situation is annoying there; I've had a similar frustration when doing manual code review for someone's obviously AI-slop PR only to have their bot auto-respond to my comments. There's an asymmetry of effort that feels unfair. Like, don't ask for manual review of something that contains lots of things that your own manual review should have caught first, and if I provide human feedback, I expect hum…

Sure - I don't hold it against them. It was just surprising to read a "Claude said you're right" message. (Yes, I know that I'm right, or I wouldn't have said it) Didn't ruin my week or anything, but that was the writing on the wall for me. Technical expertise is no longer viewed in the same light when software development has no barrier to entry.

True, though I wonder if 2026's "Claude make me a minecraft plugin" is 2006's "View Source" button.

Web development took a long time to gain respect in part due to the accessibility of it. When everyone had a nephew who "makes websites" and anyone could get started with a $5/mo Dreamhost account, it was harder to see why a consultant was worth $200/hr to do the job properly.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out, particularly accounting for bots continuing to get smarter and smarter. Is the "craft" of software engineering dying before our eyes? Or will this be like webdev, where there's an explosion of access and ideas for a time and then it settles back down into being a thing that normal people mostly leave to the nerds.

Re: The Waymo effect: how AI is quietly making research less collaborative

#298

Post by alienbaby »

Frost1x wrote: post #32

I work at an intersection of tech, applied research, and science. Something I’ve noticed in collaboration that does occur is an increased confidence in people outside their domains to say things with conviction. I have people who have limited experience with software pushing out layers and layers of abstracted code that’s fairly sophisticated but often misguided in intent who will say what they’re doing is correct, w…

"vs just opening discussing things, considering tradeoffs from experts multiple disciplines weigh in on and then taking an approach that everyone finds most agreeable."

To be honest I struggle to do this with engineers as is, even without AI being a factor. Everyone likes to claim that their way is the right way to do things and fights for it, instead of stepping back and looking at all the options and gracefully acknowledging were things could be done differently for better results.

Re: The Waymo effect: how AI is quietly making research less collaborative

#299

Post by dwaltrip »

wrsh07 wrote: post #102
scronkfinkle wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wanted you to be wrong, and to be able to make this an example of us over-reacting to certain trigger words created by AI, but unfortunately I just scanned the first couple paragraphs with pangram and it reported 100% AI, so you're probably correct. I get a funny feeling in my stomach over the idea that common and effective means of communication (i.e. it's not X it's Y) have become faux pas to use because of AI. I…

Fwiw, I only did the first 300 words (signed into pangram) and it seemingly correctly noted that there were 2 (mostly) human-authored sentences in there What's wild to me is that: 1. People are responding to this article like it's hitting a nerve 2. In most Ubers you already don't talk to the driver (yellow cabs are higher variance in NYC). Doesn't seem like anything's being lost in that case. 3. There are enormous s…

It's super obviously AI-written. I can smell this shit from a mile away now, after using Claude Code so much.

In the just first few sentences I could tell.

Re: The Waymo effect: how AI is quietly making research less collaborative

#300

Post by dwaltrip »

teiferer wrote: post #196
meowface wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you check my comment history here, I have not written this before. I like LLMs and use them daily, but I don't really like when people use them undisclosed for long-form prose writing.

Me neither, but just running around accusing random folks of things is not going to help. To the contrary. If a real author doing real work with a lot of effort risks being accused of things they didn't do and just dismissed, you'll get less of genuine content, not more.

The first few sentences alone are pure Claudish slop (I didn’t read any further). The stench is unmistakable once you’ve looked at it enough.

I’d also donate $100 if I’m wrong. I feel quite confident.

Post reply on HN