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

Stop Sloppypasta

stopsloppypasta.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 275 posts

Re: Stop Sloppypasta

#221

Post by maplethorpe »

madrox wrote: post #8

I find that I don't have a lot of sympathy for people angry at this type of behavior, even though I share the disdain for someone else's AI output. The people doing this kind of thing are not the kind of people to be reading this manifesto. We've been creating bait content for a long time, and humans have never been given the tools to manage this in any sophisticated fashion. The internet was not a bastion of high qu…

I think the difference was that before all this, there would be additional information embedded in the way a person types, or the way they'd written their code, that you could use to build a larger picture of the situation.

Right now it's as if everyone started wearing digital face masks that replaced their facial expressions with "better" ones. Sure, maybe everyone's faces weren't perfect before, but their expressions contained useful information.

Re: Stop Sloppypasta

#223

Post by jclardy »

madrox wrote: post #8

I find that I don't have a lot of sympathy for people angry at this type of behavior, even though I share the disdain for someone else's AI output. The people doing this kind of thing are not the kind of people to be reading this manifesto. We've been creating bait content for a long time, and humans have never been given the tools to manage this in any sophisticated fashion. The internet was not a bastion of high qu…

> I do find it interesting that people don't mind AI content, as long it's "their AI." The moment someone thinks it's someone else's AI output, the reaction is visceral.

Somehow nobody that replied to you mentioned this. The issue is reciprocity. If I spend two hours manually researching and using my expertise to reply to a ticket, then 10 minutes later I get a novel-length AI reply in response...I now have no respect for the person replying with AI, because they can't even be bothered to spend a few minutes and summarize their "findings" and I suspect they didn't even read what their AI wrote. Especially in a professional setting, where you were hired for your (supposed) skillset, not your prompting skills.

If I'm sending out AI content, then sure, give me AI content in return.

Re: Stop Sloppypasta

#224

Post by sillyfluke »

GuB-42 wrote: post #213
sillyfluke wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>To be fair, I don't think it is an AI problem, more of a quirk of formal communication, the same happen with human secretaries. Obviously you're not a golfer. Human sectretaries don't have non-deterministic hallucinations and random critical ommissions in their summaries, which I've witnessed first hand with LLMs. More importantly, if they do you have more deterministic mitigations with them than you do with LLMs, a…

To make things clear, even though I am not a golfer, I have a lot of respect for good secretaries, that's why I said they can do much more than write formal letters. Not only they don't hallucinate like LLMs but they can actually catch mistakes before they happen. I just wanted to point out the seemingly ridiculous idea of formal communication that none of the interested parties actually read. It is as if two English…

I think I understand that, which is why I specifically singled out your suggestion that "AI is not the problem" instead of your comment as a whole. Automated processes of Person A talking to automated processes of Person B is not a novel concept. It's been going on in various forms since computers have been invented. You call an Uber and get your phone to talk to Uber's servers and the driver's phone so you don't have to talk to the driver, same with Doordash and the restaurant, same with Amazon and the retail store personnel. In these cases the back and forth between two humans are, as in your words, a type of "formal communication that none of the interested parties actually read" or "two English speakers both bringing Spanish interpreters to talk to each other."

It's this way because us nerds want to remove the need to talk to other humans in order obtain what our hearts' desire at any given point. So we have been trying to remove non-deterministic roadblocks (humans) and replace them with deterministic automation from the very beginning. This is not new. If LLMs were the same deterministic processes but 1000x more versatile and capable then it wouldn't be a problem.

But even though LLMs have lowered the barrier on who can create these automated processes and the speed at which these automated processes are created, to achieve this they brought with them non-deterministic side effects that currently evade a holistic and deterministic fix. This is why it's an AI problem.

Re: Stop Sloppypasta

#225

Post by jobigoud »

ForgotMyUUID wrote: post #112

Do you also hear this regularly these days "But chat said ..." ?

This is the worst to me. It happened to me a few times already. Someone says or writes something wrong. You correct them. They get defensive and justify the error by saying it's what the chat bot wrote.

It's very frustrating, they delegate the responsibility of having written wrong information or code away to the bot, as if there was nothing they could do.

Re: Stop Sloppypasta

#226

Post by bigfishrunning »

djoldman wrote: post #68

What's interesting is that there are probably people who could spend a year happily working with an AI "coworker" without knowing it was an AI, but then get upset and change their viewpoint after learning the truth.

I kind of get it though -- I thought bill was just flat-out uncreative and a bad programmer, but now I've learned he's a clanker! It's a bridge too far.

Re: Stop Sloppypasta

#227

Post by leekrasnow »

bagacrap wrote: post #218
leekrasnow wrote: post #196

I disagree with the premise of automatically dismissing sloppypasta just because it is verbatim LLM output. The sender could hypothetically have spent real effort in the chat interaction that led up to the ctrl-C moment, could have spent real effort weighing all the points raised and thought to themselves “this is all valid stuff to consider, let me forward it to my colleagues and see what they think for some additio…

If you honestly think that the em dashes are the problem, I'm sure you could tell chat to scrub those for you.

em-dashes are a symptom of the problem; they are one of the “dead giveaways” mentioned in the OP which is why I brought them up as an example of slop-scrubbing before forwarding to other humans

Re: Stop Sloppypasta

#228

Post by yawnxyz »

namnnumbr wrote: post #26
rrr_oh_man wrote: post #20

It's ironic, because the site has all the hallmarks of an LLM generated website.

Oh, I 100% acknowledge the site itself was LLM generated. I'm not a web designer, so I needed a lot of help making a visually appealing site, even if that design language is at this point LLM trope. However, the essay and the guidelines were all human-written!

I believe you, but the AI-looking website makes me default to thinking that the text itself is AI generated

Re: Stop Sloppypasta

#229

Post by graphememes »

The fact this was made with AI is hilarious in of itself. Also, maybe have you thought, why someone would send you something like that? Maybe ask them, I find curiosity is better than whatever this is.

Re: Stop Sloppypasta

#230

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

czhu12 wrote: post #96

I’ve encountered an even more nightmarish version of this recently: ai generated tickets. Basically dumping the output of “write a detailed product spec for a clinical trial data collection pipeline” into a jira ticket and handing it off. Doesn’t match any of our internal product design, adds tons of extraneous features. When I brought this up with said PM they basically responded that these inaccuracies should just…

[dead]
Post reply on HN