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

ChatGPT Pulse

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 766 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#661

Post by smeej »

The thing I hate the absolute most about ChatGPT and that ultimately made me quit using it is that it absolutely will not stop making suggestions at the ends of its replies, asking me if I want some specific thing next.

Not once, not a single time, has it ever been something I actually wanted. I'm sick of telling the damn thing "No."

I have researched every possible setting. I have tried every possible prompt. But apparently "You are a helpful AI" is built into it at some non-overridable system level, where no matter what you tell it nor where, it will not stop making suggestions.

The prospect that it could now initiate conversations is like my own personal hell. I thought the existing system was the most obnoxious functionality anyone could build into a system. Now, not only have I found out I was wrong, but I'm afraid to assume this next version will be the last in this parade of horrors.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#662

Post by boogieknite »

r_lee wrote: post #552
boogieknite wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the former it started as an approach to a mass legacy code migration. sound idea with potential to save time. i followed along and understood his markdown and agent stuff for analyzing and porting legacy code i reviewed results which apply to my projects. results were mixed bag but i think it saved some time overall. but now i dont get where hes going with his ai aspirations my best attempt to understand is he wants…

I really haven't tried that stuff myself except for claude code but I do recall seeing some Amazon engineer who worked on Amazon q and his repos and they were... something. like making PRs that were him telling the ai that "we are going to utilize the x principle by z for this" and like 100s of lines of "principles" and stuff that obviously would just pollute the context and etc. like huge amounts of commits but it w…

hes already started that last step and has work paying for his pro plan

you put it nicely when you mention a fundamental limit and will borrow that if i think hes wasting a risky amount of time

i really like the sibling idea of having him try to explain again, then use claude to explain if he cant

genuine thanks to you and sibling for offering advice

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#663

Post by danenania »

Zagreus2142 wrote: post #656
danenania wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My own code quality is better with AI, because it makes it feasible to indulge my perfectionism to a much greater degree. Before AI, I usually needed to stop sooner than I would have liked to and call it good enough. Now I can justify making everything much more robust because it doesn’t take a lot longer. It’s the same story with UI/UX. Previously, I’d often have to skip little UI niceties because they take time and…

https://github.com/plandex-ai/plandex/blob/9017ba33a627c518a... Well your perfectionism needs to be pointed towards this line. If you get truly large numbers of users this will either slow down token checking directly or your process for removing ancient expired tokens (I'm assuming there is such a process...) much slower and more problematic.

Lol is that really the best example you could find?

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#664

Post by Zagreus2142 »

danenania wrote: post #663
Zagreus2142 wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.com/plandex-ai/plandex/blob/9017ba33a627c518a... Well your perfectionism needs to be pointed towards this line. If you get truly large numbers of users this will either slow down token checking directly or your process for removing ancient expired tokens (I'm assuming there is such a process...) much slower and more problematic.

Lol is that really the best example you could find?

Truly the response of someone who is a perfectionist using llms the right way and not a slop coder

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#665

Post by Applejinx »

Kiro wrote: post #225
jsheard wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My personal productivity has skyrocketed in the last 12 months. Has your productivity objectively, measurably improved or does it just feel like it has improved? Recall the METR study which caught programmers self-reporting they were 20% faster with AI when they were actually 20% slower.

The "you only think you're more productive" argument is tiresome. Yes, I know for sure that I'm more productive. There's nothing uncertain about it. Does it lead to other problems? No doubt, but claiming my productivity gains are imaginary is not serious. I've seen a lot of people who previously touted that it doesn't work at all use that study as a way to move the goalpost and pretend they've been right all along.

OK, so it sounds like this is a 'I know for certain I can't code without AI and that I get nothing coherent done, and now I'm doing the greatest things all the time, so you're demonstrably wrong!' argument.

I would ask, then, if you're qualified to evaluate that what 'you' are doing now is what you think it is? Writing off 'does it lead to other problems' with 'no doubt, but' feels like something to watch closely.

I imagine a would-be novelist who can't write a line. They've got some general notions they want to be brilliant at, but they're nowhere. Apply AI, and now there's ten million words, a series, after their continual prompts. Are they a novelist, or have they wasted a lot of time and energy cosplaying a novelist? Is their work a communication, or is it more like an inbox full of spam into which they're reading great significance because they want to believe?

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#666

Post by danenania »

Zagreus2142 wrote: post #664
danenania wrote: post #663

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol is that really the best example you could find?

Truly the response of someone who is a perfectionist using llms the right way and not a slop coder

It's just funny because there are definitely examples of bad code in that repo (as there are in any real project), but you picked something totally routine. And your critique is wrong fwiw—it would easily scale to millions of users. Perhaps you could find something better if you used AI to help you...

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#667

Post by sumeno »

iammrpayments wrote: post #424
sumeno wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No there isn't. These ridiculous numbers are made up by taking the last price a coin sold for and multiplying it by all coins. If I create a shitcoin with 1 trillion coins and then sell one to a friend for $1 I've suddenly created a coin with $1 trillion in "value"

Good luck with the SEC when you open your exchange

It's 2025, financial crimes are legal

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#668

Post by cryptoegorophy »

anon-3988 wrote: post #38

LLMs are increasingly part of intimate conversations. That proximity lets them learn how to manipulate minds. We must stop treating humans as uniquely mysterious. An unfettered market for attention and persuasion will encourage people to willingly harm their own mental lives. Think social medias are bad now? Children exposed to personalized LLMs will grow up inside many tiny, tailored realities. In a decade we may me…

In a decade? You mean today? Look at ultra left liberals and ultra right republicans. They live in different universes. We don’t even need to go far, here we have 0.001% of tech savvy population that lives in its own bubble. Algorithms just help to accelerate the division.

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#669

Post by [deleted] »

cryptoegorophy wrote: post #668
anon-3988 wrote: post #38

LLMs are increasingly part of intimate conversations. That proximity lets them learn how to manipulate minds. We must stop treating humans as uniquely mysterious. An unfettered market for attention and persuasion will encourage people to willingly harm their own mental lives. Think social medias are bad now? Children exposed to personalized LLMs will grow up inside many tiny, tailored realities. In a decade we may me…

In a decade? You mean today? Look at ultra left liberals and ultra right republicans. They live in different universes. We don’t even need to go far, here we have 0.001% of tech savvy population that lives in its own bubble. Algorithms just help to accelerate the division.

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT Pulse

#670

Post by latexr »

cwyers wrote: post #654
latexr wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even current mediocre LLM are great at writing bad first drafts. Anyone is great at creating a bad first draft. You don’t need help to create something bad, that’s why that’s a common tip. Dan Harmon is constantly hammering on that advice for writer’s block: “prove you’re a bad writer”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVqYUaUO1cQ If you get an LLM to write a first draft for you, it’ll be full of ideas which aren’t…

`Anyone is great at creating a bad first draft` Famously not so! Writer's block is real!

The rest of the paragraph and the link address exactly that.
Post reply on HN