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

We ran Anthropic’s interviews through structured LLM analysis

playbookatlas.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 91 posts

Re: We ran Anthropic’s interviews through structured LLM analysis

#31

Post by frizlab »

delusional wrote: post #25
jp8585 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually think things improved substantially when compared to last year. The latest batch of sota models is incredible (just ask any software engineer about what’s happening to their profession). It’s only a matter of time until other knowledge workers start getting the asphyxiating “vibe” coding treatment and that drama is what really fascinates me. People are absolutely torn. It seems that ai usage starts as a cl…

> just ask any software engineer about what’s happening to their profession I'm a professional developer, and nothing interesting is happening to the field. The people doing AI coding were already the weakest participants, and have not gained anything from it, except maybe optics. The thing that's suffocating is the economics. The entire economy has turned its back on actual value in pursuit of silicon valley smoke.

I would love to be able to say the same but I’m literally the only last person in the company still not using AI to code (if anything for ethics reasons, but I also truly do not need it at all), and I am obviously not the only good dev in the company. The gain is highly debatable (especially in delivery, I do not trust self-reports), however there have been recent reports of morale improvement since using AI, so at least there’s that.

Re: We ran Anthropic’s interviews through structured LLM analysis

#32

Post by jp8585 »

delusional wrote: post #25
jp8585 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually think things improved substantially when compared to last year. The latest batch of sota models is incredible (just ask any software engineer about what’s happening to their profession). It’s only a matter of time until other knowledge workers start getting the asphyxiating “vibe” coding treatment and that drama is what really fascinates me. People are absolutely torn. It seems that ai usage starts as a cl…

> just ask any software engineer about what’s happening to their profession I'm a professional developer, and nothing interesting is happening to the field. The people doing AI coding were already the weakest participants, and have not gained anything from it, except maybe optics. The thing that's suffocating is the economics. The entire economy has turned its back on actual value in pursuit of silicon valley smoke.

That’s fascinating. If you don’t mind me asking, what type of software development do you do? Have you tried any of the latest coding tools? Or even used LLMs as a replacement for stack overflow?

Re: We ran Anthropic’s interviews through structured LLM analysis

#33

Post by gopher_space »

nphardon wrote: post #21

I'm a scientist and I mostly agree with the scientist part, but I am definitely collaborating with my bot, I don't view it as "just a tool". I know this because this morning I had to do a forced reboot and my VsCode wasn't connecting to our remote servers, it took like over 5 minutes after reboot to reload my bot chat, and from like minutes 3-5 I had the distinct feeling of losing a valuable colleague.

Personification can build empathy up to a point, but the machine has no desires.

Re: We ran Anthropic’s interviews through structured LLM analysis

#34

Post by fragmede »

nphardon wrote: post #21

I'm a scientist and I mostly agree with the scientist part, but I am definitely collaborating with my bot, I don't view it as "just a tool". I know this because this morning I had to do a forced reboot and my VsCode wasn't connecting to our remote servers, it took like over 5 minutes after reboot to reload my bot chat, and from like minutes 3-5 I had the distinct feeling of losing a valuable colleague.

Mine gets ashamed and embarrassed and goes and deletes the evidence (and my project folder! Good thing I've got backups.) when it fails. It also gets lazy and tells me to go stuff when it could do it, and I have to tell it to go do it instead of me having to go do it.

Re: We ran Anthropic’s interviews through structured LLM analysis

#35

Post by WhyOhWhyQ »

fragmede wrote: post #27
WhyOhWhyQ wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have wondered about that actually. Thanks, I'll read that, looks interesting. Surely Donald Knuth and John Carmack are genuine masters though? There's the Elon Musk theory of mastery where everyone says you're great, but you hire a guy to do it, and there's the theory where you make average income but live a life fulfilled. On my deathbed I want to be the second. (Sorry this is getting off topic.)

Masters of what though? Steve Jobs wrote code early on, but he was never a great programmer. That didn’t diminish his impact at all. Same with plenty of people we label as "masters" in hindsight. The mastery isn’t always in the craft itself. What actually seems risky is anchoring your identity to being the best at a specific thing in a specific era. If you're the town’s horse whisperer, life is great right up until c…

I won't insult the man, but I never liked Steve Jobs. I'd rather be Wozniak in that story.

"taste, judgment, curiosity, or building good things with other people"

Taste is susceptible to turning into a vibes / popularity thing. I think success is mostly about (firstly just doing the basics like going to work on time and not being a dick), then ego, personality, presentation, etc... These things seem like unfulfilling preoccupations, not that I'm not susceptible to them like anyone else, so in my best life I wouldn't be so concerned about "success". I just want to master a craft and be satisfied in that pursuit.

I'd love to build good things with other people, but for whatever reason I've never found other people to build things with. So maybe I suck, that's a possibility. I think all I can do is settle on being the horse guy.

(I'm also not incurious about AI. I use AI to learn things. I just don't want to give everything away and become only a delegator.)

Edit: I'm genuinely terrified that AI is going to do ALL of the things, so there's not going to be a "survives the shift" except for having a likable / respectable / fearsome personality

Re: We ran Anthropic’s interviews through structured LLM analysis

#36

Post by doug_durham »

cmiles8 wrote: post #3

The story that’s solidifying is the tech is cool, it’s useful for certain things (eg, meeting note taking), but business have run a ton of “innovation lab” pilots that have returned little to no measurable value with leaders getting frustrated at the invested red ink. In short the substance isn't living up to the hype. Everywhere I look the adoption metrics and impact metrics are a tiny fraction of what was projected…

That's not what the data shows. Read the posting, and read Anthropic's original report. I found it a very sober, grounded report on the reality of using today's tools.

Re: We ran Anthropic’s interviews through structured LLM analysis

#37

Post by doug_durham »

Is this any different than the adoption of any technology. I think of the transition from practical effects to CGI in Hollywood. Anxiety levels of the creative model builders was sky high at the time. It worked itself out and now there are different jobs.

Re: We ran Anthropic’s interviews through structured LLM analysis

#38

Post by hugh-avherald »

Terretta wrote: post #11
jp8585 wrote: post #2

Anthropic released 1,250 interviews about AI at work. Their headline: "predominantly positive sentiments." We ran the same interviews through structured LLM analysis, and the true story is a bit different. Key findings: • 85.7% have unresolved tensions (efficiency vs quality, convenience vs skill) • Creatives struggle MOST yet adopt FASTEST • Scientists have lowest anxiety despite lowest trust (see ai as a tool, plai…

“Not X. Not Y. Z.” – Are you not willing to edit the tropes out? Or maybe teach your LLM to fix itself. Starting rule set: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing

That is not a definitive test.

Re: We ran Anthropic’s interviews through structured LLM analysis

#40

Post by WhyOhWhyQ »

doug_durham wrote: post #37

Is this any different than the adoption of any technology. I think of the transition from practical effects to CGI in Hollywood. Anxiety levels of the creative model builders was sky high at the time. It worked itself out and now there are different jobs.

Are they happy in their new jobs?
Post reply on HN