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

Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper

ploy.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 144 posts

Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper

#41

Post by jasonlotito »

SR2Z wrote: post #37
spongebobstoes wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

critique of writing style isn't made better by claiming it was authored by an LLM

No but it's a useful shorthand to describe a type of bad writing. I also think that people should focus on substance and not if AI was used, but AI writes like shit and I find myself retching a bit when I have to read long AI-written documents. Do they say something useful? Maybe, but when my eyes are glazing over because it's just so exhausting trying to parse what's written, I can't tell. I certainly think less of…

This is just an AI comment masquerading as not trying to prove a point.

Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper

#42

Post by Planktonne »

w4yai wrote: post #10
kristianp wrote: post #6

> Numbers like that buy a model a real migration effort. Such a silly choice of words. I wish the human directing the LLM writing the article put some effort into rewriting the worst examples of LLM style. > But it did extremely well, and the promise was immediate and specific: builds finishing in less than half the wall-clock time, at 27% lower cost, scoring at or above our incumbent on completed work. The way the L…

Can we get over the detective work about if the text was written by LLM or not in 2026 already ? This is a lost cause, and we could instead focus on substance over syntax.

The syntax tells you there isn't any substance.

Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper

#43

Post by aeon_ai »

jasonlotito wrote: post #41
SR2Z wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No but it's a useful shorthand to describe a type of bad writing. I also think that people should focus on substance and not if AI was used, but AI writes like shit and I find myself retching a bit when I have to read long AI-written documents. Do they say something useful? Maybe, but when my eyes are glazing over because it's just so exhausting trying to parse what's written, I can't tell. I certainly think less of…

This is just an AI comment masquerading as not trying to prove a point.

I’m as pro AI as any.

Slop is slop. When the “it works but isn’t great” phrases end up slipping into a strong conceptual core, it compromises the perception of the ideas.

Perhaps our AI will cater to us by rewriting the content we read, and each of us intermediate all communication with systems that make that slop bearable.

Or perhaps, we learn that we kinda still need to give a shit when writing to land on the perception we’re trying to create within our readers

Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper

#44

Post by mediaman »

w4yai wrote: post #10
kristianp wrote: post #6

> Numbers like that buy a model a real migration effort. Such a silly choice of words. I wish the human directing the LLM writing the article put some effort into rewriting the worst examples of LLM style. > But it did extremely well, and the promise was immediate and specific: builds finishing in less than half the wall-clock time, at 27% lower cost, scoring at or above our incumbent on completed work. The way the L…

Can we get over the detective work about if the text was written by LLM or not in 2026 already ? This is a lost cause, and we could instead focus on substance over syntax.

Because quality of writing matters.

Good communicators learn to use the written word. Bad ones rely on mental crutches.

Good communicators get an audience, and bad ones won't.

You think it's a lost cause, but it's not, because people don't like this junk, because it is low quality and, on average, lacks substance.

The best minds in AI that I've seen all write their own words. They use AI to help them research or ideate, but what they write is their own.

Before assuming this is a "lost cause," consider why the smartest people in the room don't do it.

Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper

#45

Post by SR2Z »

jasonlotito wrote: post #41
SR2Z wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No but it's a useful shorthand to describe a type of bad writing. I also think that people should focus on substance and not if AI was used, but AI writes like shit and I find myself retching a bit when I have to read long AI-written documents. Do they say something useful? Maybe, but when my eyes are glazing over because it's just so exhausting trying to parse what's written, I can't tell. I certainly think less of…

This is just an AI comment masquerading as not trying to prove a point.

Since you didn't address the substance, I guess we'll never know :)

Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper

#46

Post by alasano »

kristianp wrote: post #6

> Numbers like that buy a model a real migration effort. Such a silly choice of words. I wish the human directing the LLM writing the article put some effort into rewriting the worst examples of LLM style. > But it did extremely well, and the promise was immediate and specific: builds finishing in less than half the wall-clock time, at 27% lower cost, scoring at or above our incumbent on completed work. The way the L…

I think for a company in AI specifically it's worse.

It makes me feel like either

1) you don't use the models enough to know how they write

2) you're not self aware enough to know it matters

3) you're oblivious to the situation overall

4) you don't respect your readers

There's no good scenario.

Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper

#49

Post by illusive4080 »

w4yai wrote: post #10
kristianp wrote: post #6

> Numbers like that buy a model a real migration effort. Such a silly choice of words. I wish the human directing the LLM writing the article put some effort into rewriting the worst examples of LLM style. > But it did extremely well, and the promise was immediate and specific: builds finishing in less than half the wall-clock time, at 27% lower cost, scoring at or above our incumbent on completed work. The way the L…

Can we get over the detective work about if the text was written by LLM or not in 2026 already ? This is a lost cause, and we could instead focus on substance over syntax.

No. As a human I like reading human written text over computer written text. I want something a human composed with thought put into it. Not something a human tried to save time with by having the machine write it.

Re: Migrating a production AI agent to GPT-5.6: 2.2x faster, 27% cheaper

#50

Post by girvo »

w4yai wrote: post #10
kristianp wrote: post #6

> Numbers like that buy a model a real migration effort. Such a silly choice of words. I wish the human directing the LLM writing the article put some effort into rewriting the worst examples of LLM style. > But it did extremely well, and the promise was immediate and specific: builds finishing in less than half the wall-clock time, at 27% lower cost, scoring at or above our incumbent on completed work. The way the L…

Can we get over the detective work about if the text was written by LLM or not in 2026 already ? This is a lost cause, and we could instead focus on substance over syntax.

It means I don’t trust the substance. Whenever I try to use for technical writing like this, I catch it getting things wrong constantly.
Post reply on HN