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

821–830 of 880 posts

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#821

Post by godelski »

achierius wrote: post #801
godelski wrote: post #771

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no contradiction. > So change is impossible, you claim I claim the opposite. Just because few people defect doesn't mean that rate is fixed and immutable. That is where you misunderstand. Really, my comment is a "call to arms". It is a literally a plea to ask people of HN, including you, to become the change we all want to see. Follow your own logic. You have given up and are trying to justify it. You are not…

> You have given up and are trying to justify it While I get where you're coming from -- I think the correct thing to do is to both move for systemic change and attempt to live the life you advocate for -- I think the position of "I'm moral, why do other people need the system change in order to be 'moral' as well?" more totally abandons the actual goal (fixing things) than the other way around. Fundamentally, things…

  > I think the correct thing to do is to both move for systemic change and attempt to live the life you advocate for
You'll get no disagreement from me[0,1,2].

  > Fundamentally, things tend to change for material, systemic reasons, and so most often the best way to get at issues is not to go after individuals (whose behavior is more a symptom than the disease) but the root cause, the systemic influences that cause them to act that way.
This is the part I disagree with (as seen in my linked comments). This is a defeatist attitude that acts as if people are mindless automata. We forge our own reality. No, we don't have complete control, but we have some control. We cannot directly control the large system, but we can control ourselves and we can strongly influence those around us.

Ultimately this is the root. There's no magic wizard in the sky making people do things, there is only us. Those "systematic reasons" are a bullshit excuse to pass blame[3]. All those things are created by us. The only reason we pretend it isn't is because the results of our actions are only observed after long periods of time. It's those small decisions that add up over time. With each action we choose a better future, a worse, or a neutral. No one can predict the future, but we have a lot of evidence that short term thinking leads to worse results. I'm not asking anyone analyze every move and overload themselves with the infinite chaos. But I am saying we all need to think a few steps ahead and consider unintended consequences. To not be so rash. If things were easy, they would have already been resolved, so we so really take a moment to consider more than our gut reaction.

But ultimately, only you can control you. I hope you advocate for others around you to make good and thoughtful decisions, but there's no dragon in a cave where we can get everyone together and defeat. The dragon only is at thing of our collective consciousness. Each person that decides to defect makes the dragon a little weaker, and each person that decides to believe in the dragons power makes it a little stronger. That's the choice.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43809695

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43852024

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43787383

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43824534

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#822

Post by walleeee »

godelski wrote: post #758
walleeee wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This attitude willingly donates what agency you have to the people and things trying to take it from you. Lead by example. Mimicry is real, we all do it whether or not we are aware. Every node in the graph influences others. If you must exhort, it works better if you follow your own advice. Of course, be discerning as you do this, and don't expend your energy or goodwill where it will be wasted. Be like Gandalf. Any…

It's disheartening how many people do not want to hear this. But it's the only way we can get things done. It's the same thing that led to this system we all hate, a race to the bottom. I posted this a week back. I think you'll enjoy the article if you haven't read it yet. Don't give up, you're not alone and I think we're gaining momentum. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43824534

Cheers. I saw that one and liked it. I do wish the title was "It's not just the incentives". Incentives are people and artifices. The latter deceptive or not. But the point being in feedback.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#823

Post by sn9 »

dyauspitr wrote: post #540
karpierz wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Any job that can be done by a forklift will be done by an automated forklift that doesn't require a driver.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#824

Post by kevinventullo »

procaryote wrote: post #567
kevinventullo wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something I’ve found very helpful is when I have a murky idea in my head that would take a long time for me to articulate concisely, and I use an LLM to compress what I’m trying to say. So I type (or even dictate) a stream of consciousness with lots of parentheticals and semi-structured thoughts and ask it to summarize. I find it often does a great job at saying what I want to say, but better. (See also the famous Pa…

Learning to articulate your thoughts is pretty vital in learning to think though. An LLM could make something sound articulate even if your input is useless rambling containing the keywords you want to think about. Having someone validate a lack of thought as something useful doesn't seem good for you in the long term

Yeah, so the problem I’m solving is not that I don’t think enough about something, or even that I don’t think about it in the right way. “Murky” was maybe the wrong word. It’s more that I often find my audience does not have the longest attention span or forgiveness for sloppy writing; thus, the onus is on me to make my thoughts as easy to digest as possible.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#825

Post by palata »

seattle_spring wrote: post #789
bdangubic wrote: post #660

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you work there, as OP said, it's time to look for another job.

Totally, if you're willing to trade in your half-million or more annual compensation for $150k or less. My point is that it's an unfortunate game you have to play if you're working for places like that.

Yeah, I think another problem is that TooBigTech is able to pay insanely for... what do they bring to society again? Was it social media and ads? Anyway, all that desirable stuff /s.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#826

Post by AdieuToLogic »

zamadatix wrote: post #349
alpinisme wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The assumption you are making is that students consistently using llms is required by the best curriculum. That’s a big assumption. There may be value educationally in forcing students to learn how to do things on their own that an llm could do for them. And in that case, it’s the student failing their education if they circumvent it with an llm, not the institution’s.

At times there is value in that kind of approach, especially when the learning is specifically about those kinds of lower layers instead of higher concepts. As such, it's not that certain tools should be used in every assignment or never ever used, just whether they should be used commonly. For most continued learning it's better if the university uses calculators, compilers, prepared learning materials, and other th…

> For most continued learning it's better if the university uses calculators, compilers, prepared learning materials, and other things that do stuff on behalf of the students instead of setting the bar permanently to "the student should want to engage everything at a base level or they must not be here to learn".

IMHO, the example of using calculators in a learning environment is a great topic to explore.

Using calculators in a university setting is entirely reasonable as it is expected students have already mastered the math calculators automate. Formulae calculators are also included as, again, the expectation is a student capable of defining them have an understanding of what they are and when to use them.

Now, contrast the above with using calculators in elementary school, where basic math is an entirely new concept and the subject being taught. Here, the expectation is students learn how to perform the operations themselves through varied exercises, questions to the instructor, and practice.

> It allows much more advanced learning to be done in the long run.

Only if the fundamentals have already been established. Which leads back to my original question:

  Am I here to learn or to get a passing grade?

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#827

Post by godelski »

walleeee wrote: post #822
godelski wrote: post #758

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's disheartening how many people do not want to hear this. But it's the only way we can get things done. It's the same thing that led to this system we all hate, a race to the bottom. I posted this a week back. I think you'll enjoy the article if you haven't read it yet. Don't give up, you're not alone and I think we're gaining momentum. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43824534

Cheers. I saw that one and liked it. I do wish the title was "It's not just the incentives". Incentives are people and artifices. The latter deceptive or not. But the point being in feedback.

I think the intention of the title was to fire people up a little. Let them cook and not get away with passing the buck. Ultimately the incentive structures are a product of our actions, and the author does make that clear. So in effect, it all comes down to us.

Re: I'd rather read the prompt

#829

Post by tpmoney »

golergka wrote: post #765
tpmoney wrote: post #612

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Today I can ask ChatGPT to write me a 4 pages essay about a novel I've never heard of and call it a day. There's no value gained in the process. If we take the original article at face value, no you can't do that. ChatGPT will apparently produce something that is obviously ChatGPT produced and fail to fool even the most absent minded of instructors that you have read the material. So even with a ChatGPT LLM to help…

> If we take the original article at face value, no you can't do that. ChatGPT will apparently produce something that is obviously ChatGPT produced and fail to fool even the most absent minded of instructors that you have read the material. Only if you don't have any custom instructions about style and don't proofread it afterwards. All the usual "tells" of ChatGPT are very obvious to scrub out, and you don't have to…

Ok, but if you're going to proofread ChatGPT's output and edit it and massage it until you get something that isn't obviously the output of the LLM, how is that different from taking your buddy's homework and changing enough of the text to make it look like you didn't copy it? In either case you have to read what someone else wrote and comprehend it enough to decide what should or shouldn't change.
Post reply on HN