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

Don't be a meat proxy

gruhn.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 786 posts

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#221

Post by bjackman »

eddythompson80 wrote: post #8

I deal with this all day long at work and it’s exhausting. People almost acting like no one has thought of it “I asked Claude what happened, and it spit out this 300 line response. Can you read it for me and see if it’s right?” What kills me is you might expect this from a busy high level manager that doesn’t really understand the technical details and they just point the AI to an error they got. They don’t know how…

I think it was reasonable in the very recent past. There was a period where AI had major capabilities that had not diffused fully into the zeitgeist. So often you could see someone struggling with e.g. understanding a crash log, and say "they probably haven't thought of pasting into Claude Code with access to the codebase".

That time has now passed though.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#222

Post by globular-toast »

raincole wrote: post #164
globular-toast wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are confusing machines with motors. Many machines do things that simply are not possible without. A bicycle, for example, is not at any less work than walking, but it enables you to go faster than you can run. Menually operated sewing machines produce stitches that would be infeasible by hand. Motorising any of those machines could be considered lazy, though.

> A bicycle, for example, is not at any less work than walking What? Have you, uh, ridden a bicycle before...?

Thousands of miles on foot and tens of thousands on bicycle. Walking is essentially zero effort, so I don't see how cycling can really be easier, unless you are going downhill. People cycle because it's faster, not because it's easier. People drive because it's easier (many people still drive even if it takes longer than cycling).

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#223

Post by LeonidBugaev »

I recently had experience working with one of the top security audit firms that collaborate with OpenAI on their cybersecurity tools. What struck me is that they found a lot of various issues (not all of them ended up to be legit, but a lot is) and filled the backlog of the project. However every collaboration with that

person was essentially a proxy for some security-related agentic prompt: - Hey, agent, open the issue! - Hey, I clarified it with the agent! - Agent disagrees! - Agent agrees!

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#224

Post by theletterf »

There's a certain etiquette to it. When someone asks me something and I use an LLM to research the answer (notice that I said 'research', not 'produce'), I frame the findings as something that I've investigated with, say, Claude. I also take the time to edit the response and read if myself at least twice, because I don't want a stochastic machine to take over my identity.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#225

Post by supermatt »

> NATS control-plane events: stream leader election / R3 quorum re-form during pod churn.

Whats is wrong with this?

I work with durable tracing (not using NATS, or k8s though) and this looks almost exactly what I would expect to see in a coordinator log after repartition of a storage cluster.

Obviously I don't know what your actual context was, though.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#226

Post by hahahaa »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #203
jpnc wrote: post #2

If you create a machine for laziness you're going to get lazy people. It's only going to get worse I'm afraid. Do you guys think we're going to see a de-evolution of human beings due to technology?

Not sure about de-evolution (devolution is the word I think), just a change in how people and brains work - but you could already see this happening the past few decades. I can't read a technical book or documentation end to end ever since google results came up with specific answers within seconds.

A technical book can be so relaxing (unless e.g. too highly technical... think quantum mechanics). Imagine 50k words on an interesting tech topic without a context switch!

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#228

Post by Cthulhu_ »

c048 wrote: post #49
64e23275635e wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's already happening. IQ is already stagnating or even going down

What's even more worrying is that I've heared plenty of people defend it as, "Younger generations are just intelligent in different ways compared to older generations." I'm halfway through my 30's and this downturn started with my generation, halfway through the 80's. I hope I'm missing something, because I still need to see a benefit for lower attention spans, lower comprehensive reading skills and lower critical th…

Halfway through 30's means you were born in the 90's though, but other than that you're right, the advent of the internet, google, and rapid fire short form content has messed with our attention spans; the following generation grew up on the internet and saw the advent of high intensity videos and then short-form mobile-only infinite-stream short-form dashed-words videos.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#229

Post by hahahaa »

globular-toast wrote: post #222
raincole wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A bicycle, for example, is not at any less work than walking What? Have you, uh, ridden a bicycle before...?

Thousands of miles on foot and tens of thousands on bicycle. Walking is essentially zero effort, so I don't see how cycling can really be easier, unless you are going downhill. People cycle because it's faster, not because it's easier. People drive because it's easier (many people still drive even if it takes longer than cycling).

Cycling 2km flat (assume okay bike under 12kg) is easier than walking it. Source: have fibro so I really fell compound effort in every fibre.

Re: Don't be a meat proxy

#230

Post by schappim »

> "frequently contains all too plausible nonsense"

This really isn’t the case with frontier models in 2026.

I’ve found (sadly) that every time I thought the model was hallucinating, I was in fact the one who was mistaken.

Post reply on HN