Live data from Hacker News

AI-generated “workslop” is destroying productivity?

hbr.org

21–30 of 184 posts

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

#21
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He spent most of his day explaining why this shouldn't be merged. "Explain to me in detail exactly how and why this works, or I'm not merging." This should suffice as a response to any code the developer did not actively think about before submitting, AI generated or not.

"You're absolutely right— This code works by [...]"

If it ever stops leading with a cheery affirmation we’re doomed.

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

#23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s a tapeworm format?

Whatever the training can't assimilate, yet can be transmitted by users as analytic statements.

I'm not sure I understand this. Maybe an example would help, please?

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

#25
post #9

My friends job of late has basically become reviewing AI-generated slop his non-technical boss is generating that mostly seems to work and proving why it's not production-ready. Last week he was telling me about a PR he'd received. It should have been a simple additional CRUD endpoint, but instead it was a 2,000+ loc rats nest adding hooks that manually manipulated their cache system to make it appear to be working w…

> He spent most of his day explaining why this shouldn't be merged. "Explain to me in detail exactly how and why this works, or I'm not merging." This should suffice as a response to any code the developer did not actively think about before submitting, AI generated or not.

I think you might’ve missed this part from the post:

> AI-generated slop his non-technical boss is generating

It’s his boss. The type of boss who happily generates AI slop is likely to be the type of person who wants things done their way. The employee doesn’t have the power to block the merge if the boss wants it, thus the conversation on why it shouldn’t be merged needs to be considerably longer (or they need to quit).

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

#28

As someone who has spent the last 30 years honing my craft (programming), all I can say is this: ha ha!

I've spent 16 years and I won't exactly be cheering if we hit a wall with AI.

I love programming, but I also love building things. When I imagine what having an army of mid-level engineers that genuinely only need high level instruction to reliably complete tasks, and don't require raising hundreds of millions while become beholden to some 3rd party, would let me build... I get very excited.

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

#29
If you were around for the heyday of Markov chain email and Usenet spam this whole thing is familiar. Sure AI slop generation is not directly comparable to Markov process and generated texts are infinitely smoother yet it has similar mental signature. I believe this similarity puts me squarely in the offended 22%.

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

#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 those cases and only mention the times it worked.

It's kind of a mirror image of the global AI marketing hype-factory: Always pump/promote the ways it works well, and ignore/downplay when it works poorly.

Post reply on HN