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

AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

hbr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 184 posts

Re: AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

#141

Post by nradov »

mallowdram wrote: post #139
nradov wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you actually grasp what you're writing either, or at least you can't explain it in any coherent way, so LLMs are no worse on that score.

There are vast, unexplored sums of knowledge that LLMs can't automate, mimic or regurgitate. This is obvious simply from meme-culture. Try asking Chat GPT to derive meaning from Kirk's shooters casing engravings. Listen to the explanations unravel. Once you attach the nearly limitless loads of meaning available to event-perception (use cognitive mapping in neuroscience where behavior has no meaning, it simply has tas…

No one — human or LLM — actually knows the meanings of the phrases that Tyler James Robinson wrote on his cartridge casings. There's lots of speculation but he isn't talking, and even if he was we wouldn't know whether he was telling the truth. If you want us to take you seriously then you'll have to come up with a valid example instead of posting a bunch of pseudo-intellectual drivel.

Re: AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

#142

Post by bdangubic »

noosphr wrote: post #42
ryandrake wrote: post #30

My management chain has recently mandated the use of AI during day-to-day work, but also went the extra step to mandate that it make us more productive , too. Come annual review time, we need to write down all the ways AI made our work better. That positive outcome is pre-supposed: there doesn't seem to be any affordance for the case where AI actually makes your work worse or slower. I guess we're supposed to ignore…

Just ask an Ai to write how it made you more productive in daily work. It's really good at that. You can pad it out to 1m words by asking it to expand on each section of with subsections.

if one works at a place like ryandrake for sure so much this :) also ask it to ultrathink and be super comprehensive, you’ll be promoted in no time

Re: AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

#143

Post by mallowdram »

nradov wrote: post #141
mallowdram wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are vast, unexplored sums of knowledge that LLMs can't automate, mimic or regurgitate. This is obvious simply from meme-culture. Try asking Chat GPT to derive meaning from Kirk's shooters casing engravings. Listen to the explanations unravel. Once you attach the nearly limitless loads of meaning available to event-perception (use cognitive mapping in neuroscience where behavior has no meaning, it simply has tas…

No one — human or LLM — actually knows the meanings of the phrases that Tyler James Robinson wrote on his cartridge casings. There's lots of speculation but he isn't talking, and even if he was we wouldn't know whether he was telling the truth. If you want us to take you seriously then you'll have to come up with a valid example instead of posting a bunch of pseudo-intellectual drivel.

You're proving me correct. The pseudoscience is CS, it has no game in events. The interdisciplinary search for semantics derived from events isn't pseudo-intellectual drivel, it's the central quest of key sciences and subfields that range into neuroscience.

Of course we can concatenate meanings from his behavior and clues, but these meanings are not accessible in AI or narratives. You're essentially throwing in the towel as proof legacy explanations have died in automation in AI.

Face it CS, your approach is bureaucratic, for enforcing the dead status-quo of knowledge, not for the leading edges.

Re: AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

#144

Post by mallowdram »

pjc50 wrote: post #82
ryandrake wrote: post #30

My management chain has recently mandated the use of AI during day-to-day work, but also went the extra step to mandate that it make us more productive , too. Come annual review time, we need to write down all the ways AI made our work better. That positive outcome is pre-supposed: there doesn't seem to be any affordance for the case where AI actually makes your work worse or slower. I guess we're supposed to ignore…

It's amazing how US business culture has reinvented Soviet Stakhanovism.

This is absolutely dead-on.

Re: AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

#145

Post by shalmanese »

kingstnap wrote: post #83
Macha wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, the shit that's made up will be used to justify the decision as a success and ensure the methodology continues.

Make it long enough that it's not worth any human's time reading it. Like full-on balls to the walls slop. Pass it between different LLMs to add additional conclusions and subheadings. In fact, do it in parallel where one chatbot is adding another few pages here, and simultaneously and independently, another is adding different pages somewhere else and concatenate the results together. Once you get about 25 pages of…

Hah, that's not going to help, they're not going to read any individual response. They're going to feed the entire thing into the AI slop machine and ask it to generate them a summary. It's a slop human centipede.

Re: AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

#146

Post by Gud »

noosphr wrote: post #42
ryandrake wrote: post #30

My management chain has recently mandated the use of AI during day-to-day work, but also went the extra step to mandate that it make us more productive , too. Come annual review time, we need to write down all the ways AI made our work better. That positive outcome is pre-supposed: there doesn't seem to be any affordance for the case where AI actually makes your work worse or slower. I guess we're supposed to ignore…

Just ask an Ai to write how it made you more productive in daily work. It's really good at that. You can pad it out to 1m words by asking it to expand on each section of with subsections.

Brilliant!

Re: AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

#147

Post by pjc50 »

ryandrake wrote: post #93
justonceokay wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s about making the productivity metrics go up, even if at the expense of real productivity or common sense. The man who it was named after ironically (unironically?) faked his own metrics

It doesn't seem to even be about making metrics go up. It's about telling a narrative-reinforcing story: That AI is great. It's worth it. Leadership is right to be obsessed with it. I would have thought that in a fight between "fooling ourselves with a story" and "metrics go up" that the metrics would win, but it seems to not be the case.

Oh, if the narrative pressure is strong enough people will just fake the metrics.

The promise of replacing your expensive staff who talk back with cheap malleable AI is just too tempting.

Re: AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

#148

Post by pjc50 »

everdrive wrote: post #108
ryandrake wrote: post #30

My management chain has recently mandated the use of AI during day-to-day work, but also went the extra step to mandate that it make us more productive , too. Come annual review time, we need to write down all the ways AI made our work better. That positive outcome is pre-supposed: there doesn't seem to be any affordance for the case where AI actually makes your work worse or slower. I guess we're supposed to ignore…

This must be how conspiracy theorists feel. How could a whole class of people (the professional managerial class) all decide at once that AI was a wonderful too we all must adopt now, and it's all going to make all of us more productive and we're 100% certain about it? It boggles the mind. I'm sure just it's just social contagion, hype, and profit motive, but it definitely feels like a conspiracy sometimes.

Spending billions of dollars on marketing works.

Re: AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

#149

Post by baobabKoodaa »

meindnoch wrote: post #97
ramoz wrote: post #56

My CEO sent an ai generated blog today. I've never felt more frustrated reading something in my life. "x happened, here's what it means", "groundbreaking", "game-changer", "significant", "forefront of a technological shift"

Why are you reading your CEO's blog? This question applies whether it's written by an AI or not.

You misread. It's not the CEO's blog.

Re: AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

#150

Post by utopiah »

scrumper wrote: post #87
belval wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was in a lovely meeting where a senior "leader" was looking at effort estimates and said "Do these factor in AI-tools? Seems like it should be at least 30% lower if it did." Like I use AI tools, I even like using them, but saying "this tool is so good it will cut our dev time by 30%" should be coming from the developers themselves or their direct manager. Otherwise they are just making figures up and forcing them o…

I was that manager. I dunno about your senior leader but with me it was coming from a healthy place. After a few months of ra-ra from the C suite about how we were now an AI-first company (we're a tech consultancy building one-off stuff for customers) and should be using it in all our customer projects, I asked the question, quite reasonably I thought, "so am I going to offer lower prices to my clients, or am I going…

> I still think it's only good for demos and getting a prototype

Have you actually tried that? Because my bet is that if your "prototype" is a anything that is very VERY traditional, e.g. a CMS, online shop, or anything that has examples online, yes it will be quick, but if it's genuinely new, namely something NOT available out there, maybe because it is relying on the latest stack that is not yet well documented, then I bet it will also fail terribly.

Edit: I personally did, namely using LLMs to make XR demos relying on a now relatively popular framework https://aframe.io and basically it fails most of the time by proposing "traditional" HTML/CSS, missing entirely that it's 3D. Anyway, long story short, didn't work for me so curious to know if the "getting a prototype" (a genuine prototype, not a codebase starting from scratch because IMHO that's different) part is validated or just an idea.

Post reply on HN