251–260 of 571 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The AI is trained on human input. It uses the dash because humans did.
Is that why it uses colorful emoticons, too? Was it trained on Onlyfans updates?
Yes, it uses emoticons because human writers sometimes use emoticons.
The amount of text alone in the original post was a giveaway. LLMs produce so much text, including code, and most of it is not needed.
I recently asked for Python code to parse some data into a Pandas dataframe and got 1k lines plus tests. Whatever—I’m just importing it, so let’s YOLO and see what happens. Worked like a charm in my local environment. But I wanted to share this in a Jupyter notebook and for semi-complicated reasons I couldn’t import any project-local modules in the target environment. So I asked a much more targeted question like “give me a pandas one-liner to…” and it spit out 3 lines of code that produced the same end result.
The rest of that 1k lines was decomposing the problem into a bunch of auxiliary/utility functions to handle every imaginable edge case and adding comments to almost every line. It seems the current default settings for these tools is approximately the “enterprise-grade fizzbuzz” repo.
Sure, I’ll get better at prompting and whatever else to reduce this problem over time, but this is not viable when the costs are being pushed onto other people in the process today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Crazy on how the current 400 Billion AI bubble is based on this being feasible...
The rationale is that the AI companies are selling the shovels to both generate this pile as well as the ones we'll need to clean it up.
Crazy how he doubled down by just pasting badger's answer into Chat and submitting the (hilariously obvious AI) reply: > Thanks for the quick review. You’re right — my attached PoC does not exercise libcurl and therefore does not demonstrate a cURL bug. I retract the cookie overflow claim and apologize for the noise. Please close this report as invalid. If helpful, I can follow up separately with a minimal C reproduc…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately that seems to be the norm now – people literally reduce themselves to a copy-paste mechanism.
This has been a norm on Hacker One for over a decade.
I wonder where the balance of “Actual time saved for me” vs “Everyone else's time wasted” lies in this technological “revolution”.
Agreed. I've found some AI assistance to be tremendously helpful (Claude Code, Gemini Deep Research) but there needs to be a human in the loop . Even in a professional setting where you can hold people accountable, this pops up. If you're using AI, you need to be that human, because as soon as you create a PR / hackerone report, it should stop being the AI's PR/report, it should be yours . That means the responsibili…
And then add to that the pressure to majorly increase velocity and productivity with LLMs, that becomes less practical. Humans get squeezed and reduced to being fall guys for when the LLM screws up.
Also, Humans are just not suited to be the monitoring/sanity check layer for automation. It doesn't work for self-driving cars (because no one has that level of vigilance for passive monitoring), and it doesn't work well for many other kinds of output like code (because often it's a lot harder to reverse-engineer understanding from a review than to do it yourself).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This resonates a lot with some observations I drafted last week about "AI Slop" at the workplace. Overall, people are making a net-negative contribution by not having a sense of when to review/filter the responses generated by AI tools, because either (i) someone else is required to make that additional effort, or (ii) the problem is not solved properly. This sounds similar to a few patterns I noted - The average len…
You’re absolutely right. The patterns you’ve noted, from document verbosity to informational decay in summaries, are the primary symptoms. Would you like me to explain the feedback loop that reinforces this behavior and its potential impact on organizational knowledge integrity?
I wonder where the balance of “Actual time saved for me” vs “Everyone else's time wasted” lies in this technological “revolution”.
Agreed. I've found some AI assistance to be tremendously helpful (Claude Code, Gemini Deep Research) but there needs to be a human in the loop . Even in a professional setting where you can hold people accountable, this pops up. If you're using AI, you need to be that human, because as soon as you create a PR / hackerone report, it should stop being the AI's PR/report, it should be yours . That means the responsibili…
More than that - there needs to be a competent human in the loop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're doing it wrong: You should just feed other peoples AI-generated responses into your own AI tools and let the tool answer for you! The loop is then closed, no human time wasted, and the only effect is wasted energy to run the AI tools. It's the perfect business model to turn energy into money.
You joke, but some companies are pushing this idea unironically by putting "use AI to expand a short message into a bloated mess" and "use AI to turn a bloated mess into a brief summary" into both sides of the same product. Good job everyone, we've invented the opposite of data compression.
It's the kind of incuriosity that comes from the arrogance from believing you're very smart but actually being quite ignorant.
So it wounds like one of those guys took their misunderstanding and built and sell tools founded on it.