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

I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

lifehacky.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 141 posts

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#41

Post by wright-goes »

sampl3username wrote: post #25
cheschire wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

smart phones became a fixture because they were a key enabler for dozens of other things like fitness tracking fads, logging into key services, communication methods that were not available on desktop, etc. If AI becomes a key enabler of business, then yeah people won't have a choice. I expect this will be around the time that websites are no longer a thing and we see companies directly pumping information into AI ag…

>smart phones became a fixture because they were a key enabler for dozens of other things like fitness tracking fads, logging into key services, communication methods that were not available on desktop, etc. If AI becomes a key enabler of business, then yeah people won't have a choice. This. I need access to banking , maps and 2FA. If I could use a dumb phone, with just a camera, GPS and whatsapp, I would use it.

Access to banking is indeed critical, but when? And for 2FA, which accounts, and when? As bank apps become more invasive and they also fail to offer substantive 2FA (e.g. the forcing of text messaging as a 2FA option falls outside my risk tolerance), I've segmented my devices' access.

The ability to transfer funds is something I'm now fine doing via a dedicated device with a dedicated password manager account, and I'm fine uninstalling banks' apps from my phone and dis-enrolling cell phone numbers.

Given the wanton collection and sale of my data by many entities I hadn't expected (naivety on my part), I've restricted access to critical services by device and or web browser only. It's had the added bonus of making me more purposeful in what I'm doing, albeit at the expense of a convenience. Ultimately, I'm not saying my approach is right for everyone, but for me it's felt great to take stock of historical behavior and act accordingly.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#42

Post by blibble »

ryeats wrote: post #14

You know that teammate that makes more work for everyone else on the team because they do what they are asked to do but in the most buggy and incomprehensible way, that when you finally get them to move on to another team and you realize how much time you spent corralling them and fixing their subtle bugs and now when they are gone work doesn't seem like so much of a chore. That's AI.

> You know that teammate

now imagine he can be scaled indefinitely

you thought software was bad today?

imagine Microsoft Teams in 5 years time

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#43

Post by andersmurphy »

billy99k wrote: post #37
ryeats wrote: post #14

You know that teammate that makes more work for everyone else on the team because they do what they are asked to do but in the most buggy and incomprehensible way, that when you finally get them to move on to another team and you realize how much time you spent corralling them and fixing their subtle bugs and now when they are gone work doesn't seem like so much of a chore. That's AI.

You can think that..and you will eventually be left behind. AI is not going anywhere and can be used as a performance booster. Eventually, it will be a requirement for most tech-based jobs.

This reminds me of crypto’s “have fun being poor”. Except now it’s “have fun being left behind/being unemployed”. The more things change the more things stay the same.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#44

Post by sampl3username »

endemic wrote: post #11
zB2sj38WHAjYnvm wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is very sad.

Why? Seems like a good idea, relying on the LLM to write for you won’t develop your skills, but using it as an editor is a good middle ground. Also there’s no shame in saying an LLM is “better” than you at a task.

Art is fundamentally a human activity. No amount of artistic work can be delegated to a machine, or else the art is dehumanised.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#45

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

cheschire wrote: post #21
mrbluecoat wrote: post #13

I avoided cell phones too when they first came out. I didn't want the distraction or "digital leash". Now it's a stable fixture in my life. Some technology is simply transformational and is just a matter of time until almost everyone comes to accept it at some level. Time will tell if AI breaks through the hype curve but my gut feeling is it will within 5 years.

smart phones became a fixture because they were a key enabler for dozens of other things like fitness tracking fads, logging into key services, communication methods that were not available on desktop, etc. If AI becomes a key enabler of business, then yeah people won't have a choice. I expect this will be around the time that websites are no longer a thing and we see companies directly pumping information into AI ag…

That's not what will happen. The ad tech companies will pivot and start selling these services as neutral helpers, when in fact they'll use their knowledge of your schedule, preferences, and income to spend money on goods and services you don't really want.

It will be controlling and disempowering - manipulative personality-profiled "suggestions" with a much higher click rate than anything we have today.

And the richer you are, the more freedom you'll have to opt out and manage your own decisions.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#46

Post by rsynnott »

billy99k wrote: post #37
ryeats wrote: post #14

You know that teammate that makes more work for everyone else on the team because they do what they are asked to do but in the most buggy and incomprehensible way, that when you finally get them to move on to another team and you realize how much time you spent corralling them and fixing their subtle bugs and now when they are gone work doesn't seem like so much of a chore. That's AI.

You can think that..and you will eventually be left behind. AI is not going anywhere and can be used as a performance booster. Eventually, it will be a requirement for most tech-based jobs.

I mean, the promoters of every allegedly productivity improving fad have been saying this sort of thing for all of the twenty-odd years I’ve been in the industry.

If LLMs eventually become useful to me, I’ll adopt LLMs, I suppose. Until then, we’ll, fool me once…

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#47

Post by skydhash »

threatripper wrote: post #19
ryeats wrote: post #14

You know that teammate that makes more work for everyone else on the team because they do what they are asked to do but in the most buggy and incomprehensible way, that when you finally get them to move on to another team and you realize how much time you spent corralling them and fixing their subtle bugs and now when they are gone work doesn't seem like so much of a chore. That's AI.

You sound bitter. Did you try using more AI for the bug fixing? It gets better and better.

Cognitive load are not related to the difficulty of a task. It’s about how much mental energy is spent monitoring it. To reduce cognitive load, you either boost confidence or avoid caring. You can’t have confidence in AI output and most people proposing it looks like they’re preaching to not care about quality (because quantity yay).

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#48

Post by xerox13ster »

DavidPiper wrote: post #28
ryeats wrote: post #14

You know that teammate that makes more work for everyone else on the team because they do what they are asked to do but in the most buggy and incomprehensible way, that when you finally get them to move on to another team and you realize how much time you spent corralling them and fixing their subtle bugs and now when they are gone work doesn't seem like so much of a chore. That's AI.

We need to update Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to AI that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

And just like the original Hanlon’s Razor, this is not an excuse to be stupid or incompetent.

It is not a reason to accept stupidity or incompetence. We should reject these things and demand better.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#49

Post by ryeats »

threatripper wrote: post #34
ryeats wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My interest tend to be bleeding edge where there is little training data. I do use AI to rubber duck but can rarely use it's output directly.

I see. In my experience current LLMs are great for generating boilerplate code for basic UIs but fail at polishing UI and business logic. If it's important you need to rewrite the core logic completely because they may introduce subtle bugs due to misunderstandings or sloppiness.

Yep you are also right, some amount of boilerplate code is perfectly reasonable since some problems are similar but just different enough and unique enough they don't merit designing an architecture that gets rid of the boilerplate. this is probably the most useful thing that AI could do for us. I think I am more worried as a maintainer that we won't see that we are copying all that boilerplate too often and it's subtle bugs are multiplied and now we have to maintain all that code because AI doesn't yet do that.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#50

Post by sampl3username »

billy99k wrote: post #37
ryeats wrote: post #14

You know that teammate that makes more work for everyone else on the team because they do what they are asked to do but in the most buggy and incomprehensible way, that when you finally get them to move on to another team and you realize how much time you spent corralling them and fixing their subtle bugs and now when they are gone work doesn't seem like so much of a chore. That's AI.

You can think that..and you will eventually be left behind. AI is not going anywhere and can be used as a performance booster. Eventually, it will be a requirement for most tech-based jobs.

Left behind what? Consumeristic trash?
Post reply on HN