Live data from Hacker News

Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

holovaty.com

121–130 of 451 posts

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with passive?

In addition to the points already made, passive voice is painfully boring to read. And it's literally everywhere in technical documentation, unfortunately.

You used passive voice in the very first sentence of your comment.

Rewriting “the points already made” to “the points people have already made” would not have improved it.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#122

The music notation tool space is balkanized in a variety of ways. One of the key splits is between standard music notation and tablature, which is used for guitar and a few other instruments. People are generally on one side or another, and the notation is not even fully compatible - tablature covers information that standard notation doesn't, and vice versa. This covers fingering, articulations, "step on fuzz pedal…

I don't fully understand your comment, but Soundslice has had first-class support for tablature for more than 10 years now. There's an excellent built-in tab editor, plus importers for various formats. It's just the ASCII tab support that's new.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#123
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes the missing info is obvious, irrelevant, or intentionally not disclosed, so "The proposal was approved" can be better. Informally we often say, "They approved the proposal," in such cases, or "You approve the proposal" when we're talking about a future or otherwise temporally indefinite possibility, but that's not acceptable in formal registers. Unfortunately, the resulting correlation between the passive v…

E-Prime is cool. OOPS! I mean E-Prime cools me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime E-Prime (short for English-Prime or English Prime, sometimes É or E′) denotes a restricted form of English in which authors avoid all forms of the verb to be. E-Prime excludes forms such as be, being, been, present tense forms (am, is, are), past tense forms (was, were) along with their negative contractions (isn't, aren't, wasn't,…

I've had entire conversations in E-Prime. I found it an interestingly brain-twisting exercise, but still managed to smuggle in all kinds of covert presumptions of equivalence and essential (or analytic) attributes, even though E-Prime's designers intended it to force you to question such things.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#124
post #100
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Passive voice often adds length, impedes flow, and subtracts the useful info of who is doing something. Examples: * Active - concise, complete info: The manager approved the proposal. * Passive - wordy, awkward: The proposal was approved by the manager. * Passive - missing info: The proposal was approved. [by who?] Most experienced writers will use active unless they have a specific reason not to, e.g., to emphasize…

Sometimes the missing info is obvious, irrelevant, or intentionally not disclosed, so "The proposal was approved" can be better. Informally we often say, "They approved the proposal," in such cases, or "You approve the proposal" when we're talking about a future or otherwise temporally indefinite possibility, but that's not acceptable in formal registers. Unfortunately, the resulting correlation between the passive v…

Yep, just like tritones in music, there is a place for passive voice in writing. But also like tritones, the best general advice is that they should be avoided.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#125

People forget that while technology grows, society also grows to support that. I already strongly suspect that LLMs are just going to magnify the dominance of python as LLMs can remove the most friction from its use. Then will come the second order effects where libraries are explicitly written to be LLM friendly, further removing friction. LLMs write code best in python -> python gets used more -> python gets optimi…

In a nice world it should be the other way around. LLMs are better at producing typed code thanks to the added context and diagnostics the types add, while at the same time greatly lowering their initial learning barrier.

We don't live in a nice world, so you'll probably end up right.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition to the points already made, passive voice is painfully boring to read. And it's literally everywhere in technical documentation, unfortunately.

You used passive voice in the very first sentence of your comment. Rewriting “the points already made” to “the points people have already made” would not have improved it.

Thats not passive voice. Passive voice is painfully boring to read is active. The preamble can be read like “however”, and is unnecessary; what a former editor of mine called “throat-clearing words”.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#127
post #30

I've found this to be one of the most useful ways to use (at least) GPT-4 for programming. Instead of telling it how an API works, I make it guess, maybe starting with some example code to which a feature needs to be added. Sometimes it comes up with a better approach than I had thought of. Then I change the API so that its code works. Conversely, I sometimes present it with some existing code and ask it what it does…

This works for UX. I give it vague requirements, and it implements something i didnt ask for, but is better than i would have thought of

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#128

> ChatGPT was outright lying to people. And making us look bad in the process, setting false expectations about our service. I find it interesting that any user would attribute this issue to Soundslice. As a user, I would be annoyed that GPT is lying and wouldn't think twice about Soundslice looking bad in the process

The user might go to Soundslice and run into a wall, wasting their time, and have a negative opinion of it.

OTOH it's free(?) advertising, as long as that first impression isn't too negative.

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#129
post #30

I've found this to be one of the most useful ways to use (at least) GPT-4 for programming. Instead of telling it how an API works, I make it guess, maybe starting with some example code to which a feature needs to be added. Sometimes it comes up with a better approach than I had thought of. Then I change the API so that its code works. Conversely, I sometimes present it with some existing code and ask it what it does…

> Sometimes it comes up with a better approach than I had thought of. IMO this has always been the killer use case for AI—from Google Maps to Grammarly. I discovered Grammarly at the very last phase of writing my book. I accepted maybe 1/3 of its suggestions, which is pretty damn good considering my book had already been edited by me dozens of times AND professionally copy-edited. But if I'd have accepted all of Gram…

And that’s how everything gets flattened to same style/voice/etc.

That’s like getting rid of all languages and accents and switch to the same language

Re: Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

#130
post #66
post #30

I've found this to be one of the most useful ways to use (at least) GPT-4 for programming. Instead of telling it how an API works, I make it guess, maybe starting with some example code to which a feature needs to be added. Sometimes it comes up with a better approach than I had thought of. Then I change the API so that its code works. Conversely, I sometimes present it with some existing code and ask it what it does…

A light-weight anecdote: Many many python image-processing libraries have an `imread()` function. I didn't know about this when designing our own bespoke image-lib at work, and went with an esoteric `image_get()` that I never bothered to refactor. When I ask ChatGPT for help writing one-off scripts using the internal library I often forget to give it more context than just `import mylib` at the top, and it almost alw…

As someone not familiar with these libraries, image_get or image_read seems much clearer to me than imread. I'm wondering if the convention is worse than your instinct in this case. Maybe these AI tools will push us towards conventions that aren't always the best design.
Post reply on HN