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

I'd rather read the prompt

claytonwramsey.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 880 posts

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#531

Post by grey-area »

gsf_emergency wrote: post #355
jameshart wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve come across this analogy that I think works well: Using an LLM to do schoolwork is like taking a forklift to the gym. If all we were interested in was moving the weights around, you’d be right to use a tool to help you. But we’re doing this work for the effect it will have on you . The reason a teacher asks you a question is not because they don’t know the answer.

I think LLMs, if used correctly, can be useful for BOTH the credentialing and the human resource development (*cough*) Essentially, since they are a summary of "the" state of knowledge, the teacher should be able to ask them to put a number on how novel a piece of text is. Once LLMs are able to evaluate, independently, the soundness of an argument... (Hopefully, this will be achieved AFTER $5 H100s reach the average…

LLMs are sometimes wrong, and they don’t know they are wrong, nor do students.

They are the wrong tool for pedagogy.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#532

Post by jampekka »

const_cast wrote: post #482
soerxpso wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I should hope that the purpose of a class writing exercise is not to create an artifact of text but force the student to think I'm there for the degree. If I wanted to learn and engage with material, I could save $60,000 and do that online for free, probably more efficiently. The purpose of a class writing exercise is to get the university to give me the degree, which I cannot do by actually learning the material (…

> I could save $60,000 and do that online for free, probably more efficiently. Not to burst yours or anyone else's bubble, but no, probably not. The hard part of learning isn't access to content, it's discipline and dedication. School provides structure, goals, timelines, and deliverables. The value of this cannot be understated. I've heard from many people how they're going to learn programming online and then get a…

I'm teaching faculty at a university and, at least where it comes to lecture courses, I don't find this a bubble. There are definitely plenty of students who would do just fine, if not even better, without the external discipline and structure. And even more those who could do it with something like a MOOC or just a posted curriculum. And to be able to work without an external discipline is IMHO one of the main learning goals of university, and a decent rationale for why a university degree is taken as a signal for recruitment.

I learned programming online and got jobs as a developer (I did later study CS at a university though). In my experience the best developers are those who taught themselves. Admittedly this may have been more the case for my older generation where formal education for programming wasn't that great nor widely available.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#533

Post by seattle_spring »

palata wrote: post #247
cwalv wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of "perf review" hacking works ~everywhere; how well it works correlates with how entrenched the organization is (i.e., how hard it is for new players to disrupt). You don't have to play the game the same way to work there. But it helps to accept that others will play it, and manage your own expectations accordingly.

> This kind of "perf review" hacking works ~everywhere I don't have tons of examples, but in my experience: * This worked in toxic environments. They deserve it. * This doesn't work in a functional environment, because they don't have those bullshit metrics. If you have to rely on those tricks, it's time to look for another job.

Which big, well-paying companies do not have "those bullshit metrics"? I know for a fact that Meta, Google, Stripe, Airbnb, and Oracle all lean heavily on performance review cycles based entirely on ridiculous metrics. Getting ahead there requires you to play the stupid games GP is suggesting.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#534

Post by psychoslave »

>I believe that the main reason a human should write is to communicate original thoughts

More than communicate, I would say to induce thoughts.

I write poetry here and there (on paper, just for me). I like how exploration through lexical and syntactic spaces can be intertwined with semantics and pragnatic matters. More importantly, I appreciate how careful thoughts are playing with attention and other uncharted thoughts. The invisible side effects on mental structures happening in the creation of expression can largely outweight the importance of what is left as an artefact publicly visible.

For a far more trivial example, we can think about how notes in the margin of a book can radically change the way we engage with the reading. Even a careful spare word highlight can be a world of difference in how we engage with the topic. It's the very opposite of "reading" a few pages before realizing that not a single thought percolated into consciousness as it was wandering on something else.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#535

Post by dontTREATonme »

dmazzoni wrote: post #448
sublinear wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but piano lessons are not a music degree. Similarly, vocational programs or apprenticeships are not a formal education either. I find a lot of these comments more disturbing than the concerns about AI.

But if your goal is to be a musician, a music degree is basically useless. Whether you want to play in an orchestra, perform in a rock band, or compose video game soundtracks, nobody cares whether you have a degree or not - they want to hear you perform.

Case in point: Rachel “Raygun” Gunn. She had all the credentials in the world but single-handedly became the reason break dancing is no longer in the Olympics.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#536

Post by lurking_swe »

spiderxxxx wrote: post #524
lurking_swe wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a disingenuous argument. You don’t know what you don’t know. Literally. A completely self guided high school graduate following random online materials will not learn nearly as much on their own. Or they will go down rabbit holes and waste countless hours, and not having an expert unblock you or guide you down the right path would waste a lot of time. Further, some high school graduates (like myself at the tim…

>That’s a disingenuous argument. You don’t know what you don’t know. Literally. A completely self guided high school graduate following random online materials will not learn nearly as much on their own. Or they will go down rabbit holes and waste countless hours, and not having an expert unblock you or guide you down the right path would waste a lot of time. Citation needed. There's great books out there that provid…

I don’t have the time to provide a citation, my apologies.

I’ll leave you with this thought though. Of all the professions, tech is probably the one where this is the easiest to do. There are many companies that don’t require a bachelors. For most of the last 15-20 years tech was in a “boom” cycle, and yet the vast majority of software engineers I met DID have a bachelors degree.

Why? If it’s as easy as “pick up a book”, then why didn’t more people take that path? I think very few people have the drive and discipline to accomplish a full career prep on their own.

If your hypothesis was true, wouldn’t tech be mostly filled with self-taught engineers?

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#537

Post by chrismorgan »

zeroq wrote: post #255
sn9 wrote: post #221

> I should hope that the purpose of a class writing exercise is not to create an artifact of text but force the student to think; a language model produces the former, not the latter. It's been incredibly blackpilling seeing how many intelligent professionals and academics don't understand this, especially in education and academia. They see work as the mere production of output, without ever thinking about how that…

You're missing trees for forest. When I was a kid and got an assignement for writing an essey about "why good forces prevailed in Lords of the Rings" as a gate check to see if I actually read the novel I had three choices: (a) read the novel and write the essey myself (b) find an already written essey - not an easy task in pre-internet era but we had books with esseys on most common topics you could "copy-paste" - an…

> If I ask google maps to plot me a directions from Prague to Brussels it will yield a list of turns that will guide me to my destinations, but by any means I can't claim I've learned topography of Germany in the process.

There are multiple ways you can use such technology, too. If you use Google Maps with its out-of-the-box configuration for turn-by-turn directions, with it oriented in the direction of travel, you won’t learn so much; but if you change it to always display the map north-up, and look at the map it shows you—inferior though it be to good paper maps, in most cases—it’s easier to develop a feel for layouts and geography.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#538

Post by zjp »

I occasionally pair write with LLMs, but I give them my piece and then say, "I don't want your edits, just your feedback" and ask them some simple questions about the content and different angles on it. When the LLM says what I want it to say, I consider the piece good enough. That is to say, if a machine understands what you're saying and a human doesn't, that human's criticism might be below engaging with.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#539

Post by dyauspitr »

sn9 wrote: post #221

> I should hope that the purpose of a class writing exercise is not to create an artifact of text but force the student to think; a language model produces the former, not the latter. It's been incredibly blackpilling seeing how many intelligent professionals and academics don't understand this, especially in education and academia. They see work as the mere production of output, without ever thinking about how that…

You can’t reason through this problem. If there’s homework due, teenagers are going to use LLMs. The ones that don’t are going to work very hard just to end up with at par work with everyone else. The only solution is returning to a paradigm of heavy in class testing.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#540

Post by dyauspitr »

karpierz wrote: post #446
code_biologist wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using an LLM to do schoolwork is like taking a forklift to a gym where you're told the goal is to be healthy and strong, but they can't really stop you from using a forklift, and jobs and compensation are given out according to how much you lifted irrespective of forklift use.

Except part of the job involves lifting things in places where forklifts can't fit.

They fit in most places or will over the next few years with the next “forklift” version.
Post reply on HN