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

Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

noslopgrenade.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 453 posts

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#231

Post by toasty228 »

nlawalker wrote: post #128

I've decided that I'm done being pissy about this kind of response, or thinking that it's something that can be coached away. I choose to look at it like any other cultural communication difference - something that you learn about, try to give some grace to, and work a little harder to bridge (unless you're defusing a bomb, performing surgery, flying an airplane etc.). In this person's communication culture, they are…

Saying "I don't know" is 100x less shameful than asking a clanker for an answer and pretending it's yours. If they don't realise this they won't last long

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#232

Post by olsondv »

zephen wrote: post #222
ahtihn wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copy/pasting a question to LLM and pasting back the output isn't an attempt ar being helpful. It's the equivalent of a lmgtfy link.

Not at all. A lmgtfy link can be useful , even if rude. It's teaching someone to fish. Sharing an LLM output is simultaneously pretentious and unhelpful. To the OP's point, some might not consider it rude, but I'd rather someone be rude and helpful, rather than pretentious and unhelpful. tl;dr -- No, it's much, much worse than an lmgtfy link

Maybe 15 years ago it was helpful. Google is so ubiquitous that lmgtfy has gotten even more passive aggressive as time’s gone on.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#233

Post by ungreased0675 »

csbrooks wrote: post #129
nlawalker wrote: post #128

I've decided that I'm done being pissy about this kind of response, or thinking that it's something that can be coached away. I choose to look at it like any other cultural communication difference - something that you learn about, try to give some grace to, and work a little harder to bridge (unless you're defusing a bomb, performing surgery, flying an airplane etc.). In this person's communication culture, they are…

To me, acting in good faith means saying something like "I'm not sure, but Claude says this, which sounds right: [short informative clip from Claude's wall of text]". Don't pretend it's your response, make sure it has info you think is useful, and edit it down.

Even that is bad. It’s similar to “I don’t know, but these are the top three links when I searched Google.” It’s a useless response, verbal chaff.

And friendlies don’t use countermeasures.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#234

Post by 8note »

jplusequalt wrote: post #227
nlawalker wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To me > I'd prefer This is exactly my point. To some people, direct communication, especially "no", is extremely rude. To some people, a head bob (easily confused for a "yes" in other cultures) merely means acknowledgement, or "maybe". To some people, extended silence indicates deep consideration or respect. Globalization resulted in a need to tolerate these differences, and in my experience, trying to "fix" them i…

Stop using "culture" as a crutch for being inconsiderate.

i think you missed the point.

depending on the receiver, different and even opposing things are inconsiderate.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#235

Post by bigstrat2003 »

pmontra wrote: post #215

The point of OP could be right but I decide to provide a counter example. This morning I asked Claude to find why locale = empty string slipped into some of our customers records. Of course it's something I used to do myself but it did it in less than a minute. I couldn't match that speed, ever. Then I verified the analysis and the suggested fix. Finally I pasted Claude's analysis in a slack conversation, with attrib…

That's a best case scenario. My experience is that it's more common for an LLM to confidently predict incorrect solutions to the problem, and then you wind up wasting time chasing down wild geese. At those times, it winds up being more of a hindrance than a help.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#236

Post by bonesss »

eyelidlessness wrote: post #107
bluGill wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you start every response off with "that is a great question"? I don't know any human who does. "that is a great question" is reserved either for really hard questions, or sarcasm. The majority of questions are not great, they are just things the asker needs a simple answer.

Well before the LLM explosion I would often preface my answers with some form of praise for the question. It depends a lot on audience of course, but it’s amazing how many people tend to perceive direct answers to their questions as negative… and just as amazing how far a little strategic sycophancy goes to temper that. Even though everyone knows it’s half-sincere dead weight.

And in parallel: a non-trivial number of people in class or at work are asking questions for no reason other to establish their own social credibility as smart and or knowledgeable.

Validating their ego and effort and social position can fulfill their social desires regardless of an answer that dismisses, say, buzzword soup as both inappropriate to the current context and incoherent to people who know what those words mean.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#237

Post by zephen »

olsondv wrote: post #232
zephen wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. A lmgtfy link can be useful , even if rude. It's teaching someone to fish. Sharing an LLM output is simultaneously pretentious and unhelpful. To the OP's point, some might not consider it rude, but I'd rather someone be rude and helpful, rather than pretentious and unhelpful. tl;dr -- No, it's much, much worse than an lmgtfy link

Maybe 15 years ago it was helpful. Google is so ubiquitous that lmgtfy has gotten even more passive aggressive as time’s gone on.

It's always been passive-aggressive.

But, if done properly (e.g. vetting that the top link is actually useful, after basically using the same words in the query that you were being asked), it's a genuine reminder that google exists, can be useful, and should often be consulted before you bother someone else.

It's a teaching moment.

Prompting AI and regurgitating the slop is more akin to googling and cutting and pasting the answer. Instead of making the statement "you can do better next time" it's pretending you are an oracle with supreme super-secret knowledge.

I suppose if it fools the querent, it's all good. But, for example, if I ask you a question because I want your opinion, and I receive AI slop in return, I have just been informed that you don't even value your own opinion.

If I really asked a stupid enough question to merit lmgtfy snark, I'd appreciate the snark. If you're not even confident enough in your own opinion to snark at me, you've just taught me something, but it's probably not a lesson that will do you any long-term good.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#238

Post by Mezzie »

0x696C6961 wrote: post #25
amelius wrote: post #5

> Should we use Redis or Memcached? Couldn't they have used an example aimed at a broader audience? I'm in IT but even I barely know what Redis or Memcached is about (never used either).

90% of people here know what those are.

And if we don't (like me), I think it can be assumed that we can find out.

A basic search tells me they're both ways to speed up applications/projects through memory management and storing of the memory/data in RAM. So the person in the article is asking a co-worker their opinion on which tool they should use for optimization/performance in their project, which is why an LLM response is less helpful than his co-worker's actual thoughts: comparisons of technical tools at a high or feature level are pretty easy to find and the decision of which to use often boils down to project specific variables, so what the author is asking of the co-worker relies on the co-worker's knowledge of their specific project.

I could also probably explain this just fine to non-tech people. It wouldn't be the most complete or technically accurate explanation, but it would be fine.

Most people write based on their experience and culture.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#239

Post by SoftTalker »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #189
nlawalker wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To me > I'd prefer This is exactly my point. To some people, direct communication, especially "no", is extremely rude. To some people, a head bob (easily confused for a "yes" in other cultures) merely means acknowledgement, or "maybe". To some people, extended silence indicates deep consideration or respect. Globalization resulted in a need to tolerate these differences, and in my experience, trying to "fix" them i…

When I started managing international teams (long ago) the first months were painful for us all because I didn't understand some culturally didn't feel they could tell me 'no'. I was used to American devs that would happily flat out tell me 'I'm not doing that' or calling me out when I was being too phb style oblivious. Made me change my initial one on ones with new team leads to focus on 'how should we communicate'.…

If you were acting in good faith, no reason to feel awful. Some people are stressed out in a group or in the spotlight, no matter what. Some people thrive there and love it.

And while different regional cultures may tend one way or the other, one will find direct and indirect personality types everywhere.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#240

Post by stuxnet79 »

deaton wrote: post #122
ceejayoz wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wall of Text.

Both being infamously long

Wheel of Time is still some of the finest fantasy you will ever read. I'm personally tired of the digs at the last few books that Robert Jordan wrote before passing the baton to Brandon Sanderson.
Post reply on HN