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

I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

lifehacky.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 141 posts

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#71

Post by scarecrowbob »

0xEF wrote: post #33
ryeats wrote: post #14

You know that teammate that makes more work for everyone else on the team because they do what they are asked to do but in the most buggy and incomprehensible way, that when you finally get them to move on to another team and you realize how much time you spent corralling them and fixing their subtle bugs and now when they are gone work doesn't seem like so much of a chore. That's AI.

You are not wrong, but I pose the argument that too many people approach Gen AI as a replacement instead of a tool, and therein lies the root of the problem. When I use Claude for code, for example, I am not asking it to write my code. I'm asking it to review what I have written and either suggest improvements or ways to troubleshoot a problem I am having. I also don't always follow its advice, either, but that depen…

"Gen AI is a great tool, if you approach it with the right mindset."

People keep writing this sentence as if they aren't talking to the most tool-ed up group of humans in history.

I have no problems learning tools, from chorded key shortcuts to awk/sed/grep to configuring all three of my text editors (vim, sublime, and my IDE) to work for their various tasks.

Hell, I have preferred ligature fonts for different languages.

Sometimes tools aren't great and make your life harder, and it's not because folks aren't willing to learn the tool.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#72

Post by johnnyfived »

What's interesting about thinking of code as art is that there rarely a variety of ways of implementing logic that's all optimal. So if you decide on the implementation and have a LLM code it, you likely won't need to make major changes given the right guidelines (I just mean like a single script, for the sake of comparison).

Writing is entirely different, and for some reason, generic writing even when polished (ChatGPT-esque tone) is so much more intolerable than say AI-generated imagery. Images can blend in the background, reading takes active processing so we're much more sensitive. And for the end user of a product, they care 0 or next to 0 about AI code.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#73

Post by chistev »

DavidPiper wrote: post #28
ryeats wrote: post #14

You know that teammate that makes more work for everyone else on the team because they do what they are asked to do but in the most buggy and incomprehensible way, that when you finally get them to move on to another team and you realize how much time you spent corralling them and fixing their subtle bugs and now when they are gone work doesn't seem like so much of a chore. That's AI.

We need to update Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to AI that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

Thank you.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#74

Post by [deleted] »

scarecrowbob wrote: post #71
0xEF wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not wrong, but I pose the argument that too many people approach Gen AI as a replacement instead of a tool, and therein lies the root of the problem. When I use Claude for code, for example, I am not asking it to write my code. I'm asking it to review what I have written and either suggest improvements or ways to troubleshoot a problem I am having. I also don't always follow its advice, either, but that depen…

"Gen AI is a great tool, if you approach it with the right mindset." People keep writing this sentence as if they aren't talking to the most tool-ed up group of humans in history. I have no problems learning tools, from chorded key shortcuts to awk/sed/grep to configuring all three of my text editors (vim, sublime, and my IDE) to work for their various tasks. Hell, I have preferred ligature fonts for different langua…

[deleted]

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#76

Post by whoisyc »

jml78 wrote: post #17
DanHulton wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say that as if it's a justification, not an observation. For one, the world doesn't need to be that way, I.e. We don't need to "leave behind" anyone who doesn't immediately adopt every single piece of new technology. That's simple callousness and doesn't need to be ruthlessly obeyed. And for two, it's provably false. What is "the future?" VR? The metaverse? Blockchain? NFTs? Hydrogen cells? Driverless cars? There…

Dan, Do you have kids? Outside of discipline, and even there, I want to have a positive relationship with my sons. My oldest knows that I am not a writer, there are a ton areas that I can give legit good advice. I can actually have a fun conversation about his stories, but I have no qualifications to tell him what he might want to change. I can say what I like but my likes/dislikes are not what an editor does. I actu…

There is something deeply disturbing about your attitude towards making mistake.

You think you shouldn’t give advice because your feedback is not valuable and may even cause your son to give up writing, but you have so far given no reason why AI wouldn’t. From the entire ChatGPT “glazing” accident I can also argue that the AI can also give bad feedback. Heck most mainstream models are fine tuned to sounds like a secretary that never says no.

Sorry if this sounds rude, but it feels like the real reason you ask your son to get AI feedback is to avoid being personally responsible for mistakes. You are not using AI as a tool, you are using it as an scapegoat in case anything goes wrong.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#77

Post by K0balt »

Ai is useful in closed loop applications, often it can even do a decent job of closing the loop itself… but you need to understand that it is a fundamentally extractive, not creative, process. The body of human cultural knowledge is the underlying resource , and AI is the drill with which we pull out the parts we want.

Coding, robotics, navigation of constrained data spaces such as translation, tagging, indexing, logging, parsing, data transformations… those are all strong target candidates for transformer architecture automation.

Creative thought is not.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#78

Post by Findecanor »

sampl3username wrote: post #25
cheschire wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

smart phones became a fixture because they were a key enabler for dozens of other things like fitness tracking fads, logging into key services, communication methods that were not available on desktop, etc. If AI becomes a key enabler of business, then yeah people won't have a choice. I expect this will be around the time that websites are no longer a thing and we see companies directly pumping information into AI ag…

>smart phones became a fixture because they were a key enabler for dozens of other things like fitness tracking fads, logging into key services, communication methods that were not available on desktop, etc. If AI becomes a key enabler of business, then yeah people won't have a choice. This. I need access to banking , maps and 2FA. If I could use a dumb phone, with just a camera, GPS and whatsapp, I would use it.

I bought my first smartphone in 2020 after my old compact camera died, and I couldn't find a replacement to buy because they had been supplanted by smartphones.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#79

Post by timeon »

mrbluecoat wrote: post #13

I avoided cell phones too when they first came out. I didn't want the distraction or "digital leash". Now it's a stable fixture in my life. Some technology is simply transformational and is just a matter of time until almost everyone comes to accept it at some level. Time will tell if AI breaks through the hype curve but my gut feeling is it will within 5 years.

Analogies are not arguments.

Re: I avoid using LLMs as a publisher and writer

#80

Post by ninetyninenine »

scarecrowbob wrote: post #71
0xEF wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not wrong, but I pose the argument that too many people approach Gen AI as a replacement instead of a tool, and therein lies the root of the problem. When I use Claude for code, for example, I am not asking it to write my code. I'm asking it to review what I have written and either suggest improvements or ways to troubleshoot a problem I am having. I also don't always follow its advice, either, but that depen…

"Gen AI is a great tool, if you approach it with the right mindset." People keep writing this sentence as if they aren't talking to the most tool-ed up group of humans in history. I have no problems learning tools, from chorded key shortcuts to awk/sed/grep to configuring all three of my text editors (vim, sublime, and my IDE) to work for their various tasks. Hell, I have preferred ligature fonts for different langua…

They write that sentence because gen ai has been effective for them.

We have intelligent people using ai and claiming it’s useful.

And we have other intelligent people who’s saying it’s not useful.

I’m inclined to believe the former. You can’t be deluded about positives usefulness. But you can be about the negative simply by using the LLM in a half assed way and picking the most convenient conclusion without nuance.

Post reply on HN