Live data from Hacker News

It's rude to show AI output to people

distantprovince.by

51–60 of 257 posts

Re: It's rude to show AI output to people

#51

The author was thinking "boring and uninteresting" but settled on the word "rude." No, it's not rude. Emailing your co-workers provactive political memes or telling someone to die in a fire is rude. Using ChatGPT to write and being obvious about it marks you as an uninteresting person who may not know what they are talking about. On the other hand, emailing your prompt and the result you got can be instructive to oth…

I disagree. The most obvious message this telegraphs is "I don't respect you or your argument enough to parse it and articulate a response, why don't you argue with a machine instead". That's rude.

There is an alternative interpretation - "the LLM put it so much better than I ever could, so I copied and pasted that" - but precisely because of the ambiguity, you don't want to be sneaky about it. If you want me to have a look at what the LLM said, make it clear.

A meta-consideration here is that there is just an asymmetry of effort when I'm trying to formulate arguments "manually" and you're using an LLM to debate them. On some level, it might be fair game. On another, it's pretty short-sighted: the end game is that we both use LLMs that endlessly debate each other while drifting off into the absurd.

Re: It's rude to show AI output to people

#52

Could not agree more! > "I asked ChatGPT and this is what it said: ". ... > "I vibe-coded this pull request in just 15 minutes. Please review" This is even nice. You have outlined here an actual warning. Usually there is none. When you get this type of request you are pretty much debugging AI code on the spot without any additional context. You can just see when text/code is AI generated or not. No matter text or cod…

> I vibe-coded this pull request in just 15 minutes. Please review

"I hand-typed this close message in just 15 seconds. Please refrain."

Re: It's rude to show AI output to people

#53

The author was thinking "boring and uninteresting" but settled on the word "rude." No, it's not rude. Emailing your co-workers provactive political memes or telling someone to die in a fire is rude. Using ChatGPT to write and being obvious about it marks you as an uninteresting person who may not know what they are talking about. On the other hand, emailing your prompt and the result you got can be instructive to oth…

It's rude like calling someone on the phone is rude or SCREAMING IN ALL CAPS is rude. It's a new social norm that the author is pointing out.

Re: It's rude to show AI output to people

#54
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. What a good giveaway. I wonder what others there are. I occasionally use bullet points, emdashes (unicode, single, and double hyphens) and words like "delve". I hate it think these are the new heuristics. I think AI is a useful tool (especially image and video models), but I've already had folks (on HN [1]!) call out my fully artisanal comments as LLM-generated. It's almost as annoying as getting low-effort LLM…

Maybe I'm misunderstanding - but I don't think LLM's say cow-orkers. Or is that what you mean?

[deleted]

Re: It's rude to show AI output to people

#55
post #29

I couldn't disagree more. Its like someone going to Wikipedia to helpfully copy and paste a summary of an issue. Fast and with a good enough level of accuracy. Generally the AI summaries I see are more topical and accurate than the many other comments in the thread.

They are mostly posturing.

I don't see any problem sharing a human-reviewed LLM output.

(I also figure that human review may not be that necessary in a few years.)

Re: It's rude to show AI output to people

#56
post #4

I really wish some of my coworkers would stop using LLMs to write me emails or even Teams messages. It does feel extremely rude, to the point I don't even want to read them anymore.

LinkedIn is probably the worst culprit. It has always been a wasteland of “corporate/professional slop”, except now the interface deliberately suggests AI-generated responses to posts. I genuinely cannot think of a worse “social network” than that hell hole.

“Very insightful! Truly a masterclass in turning everyday professional rituals into transformative personal branding opportunities. Your ability to synergize authenticity, thought leadership, and self-congratulation is unparalleled.”

Re: It's rude to show AI output to people

#57
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Use two dashes instead of an actual em dash. ChatGPT, at least, cannot do the same--it just can't.

As a frequent user of two dashes.. I hate how people now associate it with AI. Also, that "cow-orkers" doesn't look like AI-generated slop at all..? Just scrolling down a bit shows that most of them are three years and older.

[deleted]

Re: It's rude to show AI output to people

#58

>> "I asked ChatGPT and this is what it said: ". > Whoa, let me stop you right here buddy, what you're doing here is extremely, horribly rude. How is it any different from "I read book and it said that..."? Or "Book has the following quote about that:"? I definitely want to know where people are getting their info. It helps me understand how trustworthy it might be. It's not rude, it's providing proper context.

Because published books, depending on genre, have earned a presumption of being based on reality. And it's easy to reproduce a book lookup, and see if they link to sources. I might have experience with that book and know of its connection with reality.

ChatGPT and similar have not earned a presumption of reality for me, and the same question may get many different answers, and afaik, even if you ask it for sources, they're not necessarily real either.

IMHO, it's rude to use ChatGPT and share it with me as if it's informative; it disrespects my search for truth. It's better that you mention it, so I can disregard the whole thing.

Re: It's rude to show AI output to people

#59

It's deeply sad to me that I will never again be able to read a message from someone and know, for sure, that it was written by them themselves.

We will have a web where proof of humanity is the de facto standard. Its only a question of when. Things have to get worse before they get better in afraid

How would that help? Plenty of humans will just continue to be willing AI-proxies.
Post reply on HN