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

You can just say it

noperator.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 241 posts

Re: You can just say it

#81

Post by hxtk »

cautiouscat wrote: post #19

This quote from the authors friend really hit home with me. > “If you’re going to use an LLM to write me an email, I’d much rather you just send me the prompt; at least then I’d have an idea of what you actually meant to say.” I’m not saying there’s no merit in adding a bit of politeness and professionalism to your communication, which I’m sure the prompt itself lacks. However the root of what you’re trying to convey…

When I read what someone has written, I learn things beyond its literal text from the fact that I’m reading it, which implies it was worth effort for them to put into so many words and send to me through the medium they chose and put the level of care that they chose into their wording.

The LLM erases those choices and erases the cost of verbosity so there’s much less for me to learn from a message, and much less I stand to learn about a person though repeated exchanges to help me better contextualize future messages I receive from them.

Re: You can just say it

#82

Post by dfxm12 »

beering wrote: post #5

So many people have spent a lot of energy dehumanizing others on the basis of their “contribution to society”. Ideas like, if you aren’t employed, you shouldn’t have access to healthcare, etc. I can only hope that AI can force people to rethink whether their value is tied to their work output or not.

AI has been around in various forms for a little while now. Have you seen anything to suggest that this is even a possibility?

Weigh this against the context that people have had centuries to figure this out.

Re: You can just say it

#83

Post by righthand »

thrownthatway wrote: post #62
drooby wrote: post #21

There is a class of human output that will retain value regardless of AI capability: art and sport. People care about the creator. The source defines the work, the awe, and the emotional response. But almost all output outside that space is at risk of AI displacement. Corporations are amoral entities that optimize for profit, and they follow the law only as much as they must. The law is our collective action. We soci…

[flagged]

Yeah corporate socialism is working so well this time.

Re: You can just say it

#84

Post by triyambakam »

happytoexplain wrote: post #8
triyambakam wrote: post #4

Citing "God created man in his own image" for robustness doesn't really land well. I'm not even an atheist either.

What a strange world - I'm an atheist, and the quoted argument resonates intensely with me, as somebody who believes in the innate value of humans even in the face of objectivity.

I complete agree humans have this innate value. But I don't see how the Genesis quote is useful to support that

Re: You can just say it

#85

Post by triyambakam »

cvoss wrote: post #55
triyambakam wrote: post #4

Citing "God created man in his own image" for robustness doesn't really land well. I'm not even an atheist either.

If you believe in the objective truth of the quoted source, then that makes the claim that humans are valuable about as robust as any claim can be. If you do not believe in the objective truth of the quoted source, you must still reckon with the fact that this is the (start of) the punchline of the opening narrative of the foundational text of the world's largest religion or religion family. (The punchline continues…

> That is to say, this is an incredibly widely and deeply held value by a vast number of people over millenia, not to mention the many others whose religions may contain analogous claims.

So fallacious?

Re: You can just say it

#86

Post by triyambakam »

triyambakam wrote: post #4

Citing "God created man in his own image" for robustness doesn't really land well. I'm not even an atheist either.

Since it's too late to edit: I am not disagreeing that humans are innately valuable. I am disagreeing with citing Genesis for that.

Re: You can just say it

#87

Post by rogerrogerr »

bentcorner wrote: post #64
cautiouscat wrote: post #19

This quote from the authors friend really hit home with me. > “If you’re going to use an LLM to write me an email, I’d much rather you just send me the prompt; at least then I’d have an idea of what you actually meant to say.” I’m not saying there’s no merit in adding a bit of politeness and professionalism to your communication, which I’m sure the prompt itself lacks. However the root of what you’re trying to convey…

> Also I just find it a little insulting if someone sends me an AI response I run into this with AI-generated PR comments. I think where I work we are still grappling with the "right point", because LLMs can certainly provide valuable feedback, but they are not at the point where they can do so unsupervised, and to do so just feels unprofessional. And there's another layer where it is even worse when a colleague spen…

I often use LLMs to write or review code, but never ever copy/paste from them into any text box attached to my name.

If my name is posting something, I understand it. If I can read an LLM response and reword it, I understand it.

I really want copying LLM prose into anywhere without a block quote to be a firable offense.

Re: You can just say it

#88

Post by madrox »

Humans are valuable, but I think we've been putting human output on a pedestal lately. There's a lot of human slop (as the author put it) on the internet. Slop businesses. Slop social media accounts. While there's very little in the world of AI I find that is better than what a human proficient in the skill with sufficient time can do, proficiency and time are in short supply by most people.

Cue that "I, Robot" meme about if a machine can make a symphony. Maybe AI is making it even easier, but intentless form is already everywhere without AI, if you look. Ever seen an Uwe Boll film?

Re: You can just say it

#89

Post by madrox »

cautiouscat wrote: post #19

This quote from the authors friend really hit home with me. > “If you’re going to use an LLM to write me an email, I’d much rather you just send me the prompt; at least then I’d have an idea of what you actually meant to say.” I’m not saying there’s no merit in adding a bit of politeness and professionalism to your communication, which I’m sure the prompt itself lacks. However the root of what you’re trying to convey…

While I tend to agree, if that email were about arranging a D&D session, I don't think I would care. Especially if the alternative is we never find a time to play D&D.

Re: You can just say it

#90

Post by gnabgib »

sethammons wrote: post #78
gnabgib wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

What do you feel your response added to the conversation? To me, it reads as a petty attack on a person who is using assisted technology to engage with the community. Which only reflects negatively on you and makes you a jerk and a bully.

You feel someone who is admitting to violating participation and discussion rules.. is adding to the conversation?

> Don't post generated comments or AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN