Live data from Hacker News

You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

hackerone.com

311–320 of 571 posts

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#311

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…

I wonder if there was a human in the loop to begin with. I hope the future of CVS is not agents opening accounts and posting 'bugs'

Don't need a human until someone is ready to pay a bounty!

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are spelling correction PRs not welcome? I'd never put it on a résumé but if I'm following a README and I see a typo, I'll generally open a quick PR to fix that. (no automated tools, not scanning for typos, just a human reading a README).

> Are spelling correction PRs not welcome? I think a true spelling correction would be welcome. But I think the kind BS attitude the GP is describing often leads to useless reformatting/language tweaks, because the goal isn't to make the repo better, it's to make a change for making a change's sake with as little effort as possible.

Kind of like how on the Salesforce support forums, there are a lot of incorrect answers from people who don't appear to have understood the question, but they all have "Please mark my answer as helpful" at the bottom. (And this started long before AI.) If there's an incentive to "contribute," even if it's something as small as being able to put "Salesforce support volunteer" on your LinkedIn page, and it's very easy to do so, you'll get a lot of low-effort (or worse) contributions.

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#313
post #308
post #180

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…

This is the bull case for AI, as with any significant advance in technology eventually you have no choice but to use it. In this case, the only way to filter through large volumes of AI output is going to be with other LLM models. The exponential growth of compute and data continues.. As a side note, if anyone I'm communicating with - personally or in business - sends responses that sound like they were written by Ch…

> As a side note, if anyone I'm communicating with - personally or in business - sends responses that sound like they were written by ChatGPT 3.5, 4o, GPT-5-low, etc, I don't take anything they write seriously anymore.

What if they are a very limited English speaker, using the AI to tighten up their responses into grammatical, idiomatic English?

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#314
post #180

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…

> - The average length of documents and emails has increased. Brevity is the soul of wit. Unfortunately, many people think more is better.

People have also veered strongly toward anti-intellectualism in recent decades. Coincidence?

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#315
post #229
post #14

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.

Two economists are walking in a forest when they come across a pile of shit. The first economist says to the other “I’ll pay you $100 to eat that pile of shit.” The second economist takes the $100 and eats the pile of shit. They continue walking until they come across a second pile of shit. The second economist turns to the first and says “I’ll pay you $100 to eat that pile of shit.” The first economist takes the $10…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#316
post #11

Over time, I've gotten a feel for what kind of content is AI-generated (e.g., images, text, and especially code...), and this text screams "AI" from top to bottom. I think badger responded very professionally; I'd be interested to see Linus Torvalds' reaction in such a situation :D

It’s interesting that you say that because besides the other perspectives on this type of matter, something I have come across is accusations of AI text that at the very least were not at all clearly AI, but also seemed like the accusation was simply a coping mechanism to deflect/evade having to accept or face new informatio/reality that was counter to one’s mental model or framework. I think of that recent situation…

I think you're veering too far into politics on what was originally not a very political OP/thread, but I'll indulge you a tiny bit and also try to bring the thread back to the original theme.

You said a lot of words that I basically boil down to a thesis of, the value of "truth" is being diluted in real-time across our society (with flood-the-zone kinds of strategies), and there are powerful vested interested who benefit from such a dilution. When I say powerful interests, I don't meant to imply Illuminati and Freemasons and massive conspiracies -- Trump is just some angry senile fool with a nuclear football, who as you said has learned to reflexively use "AI" as the new "fake news" retort to information he doesn't like / wishes weren't true. But corporations also benefit.

Google benefited tremendously from inserting itself into everyone's search habits, and squeezed some (a lot of) ad money out of being your gatekeeper to information. The new crop of AI companies (and Google and Meta and the old generation too) want to do the same thing again, but this time there's a twist -- whereas before the search+ads business could spam you with low-quality results (in proto-form, starting as the popup ads of yesteryear), but it didn't necessarily directly try to attack your view of "truth". In the future, you may search for a product you want to buy, and instead of serving you ads related to that product, you may be served disinformation to sway your view of what is "true".

And sure negative advertising always existed (one company bad-mouthing another competitor's products), but those things took time and effort/resources, and also once upon a time we had such things as truth-in-advertising laws and libel laws but those concepts seem quaint and unlikely to be enforced/supported by this administration in the US. What AI enables is "zero marginal cost" scaling of disinformation and reality distortion, and in a world where "truth" erodes, instead of there being a market incentive for someone to profit off of being more truth-y than other market participants, on the contrary I would except that the oligopolistic world we live in would conclude that devaluaing truth is more profitable for all parties (a sort of implicit collusion or cartel-like effect, with companies controlling the flow of truth, like OPEC controlling their flow of oil).

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#317
post #13

"I heard you were extremely quick at math" Me: "yes, as a matter of fact I am" Interviewer: "Whats 14x27" Me: "49" Interviewer: "that's not even close" me: "yeah, but it was fast"

There should be a language that uses "Almost-In-Time" compilation. If it runs out of time, it just gives a random answer.

When you get the wrong answer you can just say 'ah yes, the halting problem'

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#318
Lord, did anyone else click through and read the actual attached "POC"? It's (for now) hilariously obviously doing nothing interesting at all, but my blood runs cold at AI potentially being able to generate more plausible-looking POC code in the future to waste even more dev time...

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#319
post #309
post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems to me like people have to push back more directly with a collective effort; otherwise the incentives are all wrong.

What I don't get, is why people think this action has value. The maintainer of the project could ask an LLM to do that. A senior dev. I can't imagine Googling for something, seeing someone on (for example) stackoverflow commenting on code, and then filing a bug to the maintainer. And just copy and pasting what someone else said, into the bug report. All without even comprehending the code, the project, or even runnin…

The person who submitted the report was looking to be a person who found a critical bug, that's it. It's not about understanding/fixing/helping anything, it's about gaining clout.

Re: You did this with an AI and you do not understand what you're doing here

#320
On another note, I actually received a clearly GPT generated GitHub PR but eventually merged it. The changes were just doc changes but they seemed okay enough to add.

I feel like the goal is to get your name on a project, but I don't really lose anything from contributions like this

Post reply on HN