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

301–310 of 453 posts

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#301

Post by SchemaLoad »

otherme123 wrote: post #275
SoftTalker wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd prefer just "I don't know." I can ask Claude on my own.

Some years ago, answering "just google it!" was considered rude in some forums. It was asumed that some people didn't have enough googlefu, so googling for them was considered a good help. Also, almost all StackOverflow could be boiled down to a "RTFM" and close the questions. Today there might be people who can't extract enough juice from LLMs, so it is not entirely useless to say "I was able to extract this info fr…

Except 99% of the time they are asking it's because they explicitly need a real opinion or the info couldn't be found via LLMs. But instead of giving an "I don't know", they paste back an wall of text with an incorrect answer that the sender hasn't even read or verified to be true.

At least with "I don't know" the asker can move on to someone who might know faster.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#302

Post by _DeadFred_ »

chowells wrote: post #255
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…

What's culture got to do with it? If I wanted LLM responses, I'd have prompted for them myself. This is true in every single culture. The very fact that I asked a person means that I want the information they can provide, not LLM information. There is no culture in which that is false. So there is no culture in which providing LLM content is a useful response. How you politely communicate that you don't have anything…

If in my culture I can't tell the boss 'I don't know' 'I can't do it' and I am handed a machine and told it's an answer machine, I can understand this conflict coming up. OP specifically said " I don't even entirely disagree, I just think it's worth reflecting on". OP is saying there might be dynamics that can be resolved with understanding why you are getting AI.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#303

Post by SchemaLoad »

Aurornis wrote: post #190
nikeee wrote: post #67

When I'm encountering some WoT like that, I'd like to have a button like "view source", but for "view prompt". Most ai generated messages or docs are unnecessarily verbose and just reading the prompt would suffice. I don't really get why some people seem to think that it's somehow better to have their bullet point prompt as a huge text. It just wastes my time. And probably only makes it look like it took more effort…

> I don't really get why some people seem to think that it's somehow better to have their bullet point prompt as a huge text. Simple: It looks like you did more work. Before everyone had ChatGPT, a long document meant that someone sat at their computer and invested more effort than someone rattling off a list of partially formed bullet points. In the process of writing the doc they usually refined the idea. Now anyon…

But now I can use AI to summarise the wall of text back in to the original bullet points.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#305

Post by SchemaLoad »

SwiftyBug wrote: post #8

> Nobody writes essays in Slack I 100% write long texts in Slack. I always try to provide as much context as possible when reaching out to someone with a question or request.

There's a difference between a long text and an essay. You wouldn't spend hours typing a message and formatting it with headlines for example. You wouldn't insert loads of unessorasy creative writing techniques in to a message asking for help.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#306

Post by SchemaLoad »

rib3ye wrote: post #199
SwiftyBug wrote: post #8

> Nobody writes essays in Slack I 100% write long texts in Slack. I always try to provide as much context as possible when reaching out to someone with a question or request.

Please learn to love bullet points for the sake of the reader.

When a person expands bullet points they add extra information from their own knowledge and research in the process of writing. When AI does it, it adds filler and repetition.

Long form writing itself isn't a problem, it's the empty fake long form we have now.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#307

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#308

Post by Terr_ »

filoeleven wrote: post #284
Terr_ wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Next, the recipient of the wall-of-text throws it into another LLM to "summarize" it to bullet-points, adding another hop of the game of telephone as it mutates what was already a fake artifact of thinking that was never done. *sigh*

And the money keeps on rolling upward...

To cynically summarize a disturbing portion of LLM business-models:

1. Find companies which require or reward employees for generating bullshit, fluff, or unreliable signals for actual work that isn't measured well.

2. Offer those employees convenient BS-as-a-Service.

3. Convince the corporation to subsidize the new bullshit-production method as a business expense.

I hope this results in the overloaded collapse of the underlying bullshit mechanics... but I don't particularly expect it.

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#309

Post by krater23 »

satisfice wrote: post #54

“Worse: it's a conversation killer. There's nothing to respond to. Your wall of text suppresses dialogue. They can't reply, can't push back, can't clarify. It's a weapon disguised as helpfulness.” I can reply. I can push back. I can clarify. I am not helpless.

"TLDR?"

Re: Throwing AI-generated walls of text into conversations

#310

Post by frays »

hungryhobbit wrote: post #259

AI conversations are like dreams: everyone has one they like and wants to share it with others ... but no on gives a crap about your dream/chat session, because it was uniquely appealing to you , and not them. Don't bore your co-workers (or others) with descriptions of your dreams, and don't throw a computer's dreams (AI chat logs) at them either.

> AI conversations are like dreams: everyone has one they like and wants to share it with others ... but no on gives a crap about your dream/chat session, because it was uniquely appealing to you, and not them.

> Don't bore your co-workers (or others) with descriptions of your dreams, and don't throw a computer's dreams (AI chat logs) at them either.

This is a great quote, thanks for sharing.

Post reply on HN