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

It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

blog.pabloecortez.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 565 posts

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#551

Post by standardly »

ManuelKiessling wrote: post #312
jihadjihad wrote: post #23

It's similarly insulting to read your AI-generated pull request. If I see another "dart-on-target" emoji... You're telling me I need to use 100% of my brain, reasoning power, and time to go over your code, but you didn't feel the need to hold yourself to the same standard?

Why have the LLMs „learned“ to write PRs (and other stuff) this way? This style was definitely not mainstream on Github (or Reddit) pre-LLMs, was it? It’s strange how AI style is so easy to spot. If LLMs just follow the style that they encountered most frequently during training, wouldn’t that mean that their style would be especially hard to spot?

RLHF and system prompt, I assume. But isn't being able to identify LLM output a good thing?

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#552

Post by demetris »

mjr00 wrote: post #58
dewey wrote: post #16

> No, don't use it to fix your grammar, or for translations I think that's the best use case and it's not AI related as spell-checkers and translation integrations exist forever, now they are just better. Especially for non-native speakers that work in a globalized market. Why wouldn't they use the tool in their toolbox?

> Especially for non-native speakers that work in a globalized market. Why wouldn't they use the tool in their toolbox? My wife is ESL. She's asked me to review documents such as her resume, emails, etc. It's immediately obvious to me that it's been run through ChatGPT, and I'm sure it's immediately obvious to whomever she's sending the email. While it's a great tool to suggest alternatives and fix grammar mistakes t…

Thanks for no cap! I looked it up and learned something new today. :-D

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#554

Post by desantisll »

NewsaHackO wrote: post #379
ManuelKiessling wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why have the LLMs „learned“ to write PRs (and other stuff) this way? This style was definitely not mainstream on Github (or Reddit) pre-LLMs, was it? It’s strange how AI style is so easy to spot. If LLMs just follow the style that they encountered most frequently during training, wouldn’t that mean that their style would be especially hard to spot?

I wonder if it's due to emojis being able to express a large amount of infomation per token. For instance, the bulls-eye emoji is 16 bits. Also, Emoji's don't have the language barrier.

ding ding ding. a picture is worth a thousand, a word is worth several characters. then what happens when you can fit a picture in a character?

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#555

Post by coldtea »

jihadjihad wrote: post #23

It's similarly insulting to read your AI-generated pull request. If I see another "dart-on-target" emoji... You're telling me I need to use 100% of my brain, reasoning power, and time to go over your code, but you didn't feel the need to hold yourself to the same standard?

>You're telling me I need to use 100% of my brain, reasoning power, and time to go over your code

No, they're expecting you to half-ass it too, and just use AI to review the PR.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#556

Post by coldtea »

y0eswddl wrote: post #503
WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may thank millenial hipsters who used think emojis are cute and proliferation of little javascript libraries authored by them on your friendly neighborhood githubs. Later the cutest of the emojis paved their way into templates used by bots and tools, and it exploded like colorful vomit confetti all over the internets. When I see this emojiful text, my first association is not with an LLM, but with a lumberjack-be…

Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read this comment. I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.

No, they are pretty spot on. It's a legitimate complain.

Your comment however is just an ad hominem.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#557

Post by coldtea »

ljm wrote: post #512
y0eswddl wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read this comment. I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.

I love how these elaborate stereotypes reveal more about the author than the group of people they are lampooning.

Nah, they perfectly evoke the group they're lampooning.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#558

Post by oceanplexian »

h4ck_th3_pl4n3t wrote: post #542
SamPatt wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt this. I've done AI annotation work on the big models. Part of my job was comparing two model outputs and rating which is better, and using detailed criteria to explain why it's better. The HF part. That's a lot of expensive work they're doing, and ignoring, if they're just later poisoning the models!

GP kind of implying that AGI is already there, and all companies are just dumbing them down because of regulations of the law. I'm like "Sure buddy, sure. And the nanobots are in all vaccines, right?"

If your company built a super intelligent LLM, say that could find Alpha in the financial markets, would you make it public to anyone with a ChatGPT subscription?

Of course not! They would use it to trade and would keep it concealed while throwing the public a bone with a less advanced version. Same thing applies as AGI or even as code gen gets better.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#559

Post by h4ck_th3_pl4n3t »

oceanplexian wrote: post #558
h4ck_th3_pl4n3t wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP kind of implying that AGI is already there, and all companies are just dumbing them down because of regulations of the law. I'm like "Sure buddy, sure. And the nanobots are in all vaccines, right?"

If your company built a super intelligent LLM, say that could find Alpha in the financial markets, would you make it public to anyone with a ChatGPT subscription? Of course not! They would use it to trade and would keep it concealed while throwing the public a bone with a less advanced version. Same thing applies as AGI or even as code gen gets better.

How often did you see an actual UFO?

How likely is it that you saw a plane made by humans that you misclassified due to lack of data vs how likely is it that it was actually an Alien made aircraft, coincidentally working in our atmospheric conditions, gravity and drag related physics?

Guess what, it's about likeliness and you are extrapolating the wrong assumptions. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not the other way around.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#560

Post by tincholio »

godelski wrote: post #272
mikepurvis wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would never put up a copilot PR for colleague review without fully reviewing it myself first. But once that’s done, why not?

> But once that’s done, why not? Do you have the same understanding of the code? Be honest here. I don't think you do. Just like none of us have the same understanding of the code somebody else wrote. It's just a fact that you understand the code you wrote better than code you didn't. I'm not saying you don't understand the code, that's different. But there's a deeper understanding to code you wrote, right? You might…

My take on this is that when outsourcing the code writing, you miss out on building a mental model of how it works that you do develop when doing it yourself. The degree to which that is a problem is probably variable, I suppose.
Post reply on HN