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

If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

tombedor.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 551 posts

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#91

Post by Jimmc414 »

mysterydip wrote: post #80
LambdaComplex wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ask Fable to conduct an adversarial /ultareview of their PR and send the same wall of text back to them. This won't help. Your wall of text will just get fed right back into the LLM.

What I don’t understand is what value is the person adding to this equation? Put another way, what’s the difference between them feeding the wall of text to the LLM, and you feeding the wall of text to the LLM, bypassing them in the process entirely?

The role of the person in the equation is to take personal responsibility for the proposed change and review the changes prior to PR submission. You can't put AI on a PIP. It's acceptable to use AI as a coding assistant in 2026, but if a human is not reviewing what they submit and taking responsibility, their value is on par with a ChatGPT subscription.

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#93

Post by beej71 »

zetanor wrote: post #56

What I find strange is how rarely LLM output is distributed alongside the LLM input, especially outside of code repos. Why can't I rerun the prompt that resulted in your work next year, when models have gotten better? Are people ashamed of their prompts? Ashamed of having used AI? i unno Prompt used to generate this message: "Create a comment for Hacker News which bemoans the lack of AI prompts being shared with the…

FMFL. I'm going to build a paper-based social network where non-handwriting is prohibited. Like in the 70s.

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#95

Post by rodonn »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #48

This headline has been seeing some popularity. But it's never made any sense. This is just the labor theory of value, applied to documents. The labor theory of value doesn't work for documents any more than it works for anything else. If I do something that's easy for me, and it's valuable to you, you'll still want it. If I do something that's difficult for me, it will be less valuable to you, because the difficulty…

The problem is that I don't know before I read a doc whether or not it will be useful and valuable.

If someone wants me to spend my time and attention on something they have shared, I would like them to demonstrate that they put a proportionate amount of time and effort into its production.

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#96

Post by Gigachad »

BoxFour wrote: post #50
Gigachad wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either that, or call them / walk up to their desk and pick a point from the wall of text and ask them to explain what they mean by it. Then watch them turn red as they have no idea what the message they sent to you means.

I think you're over-estimating how much some people care. I have had coworkers say "Oh I don't know, Claude added that" in response to questions like that without even a hint of shame or self-reflection.

Sure, some people have no self awareness. In that case you can change your approach, if you are a manager or otherwise invested in the company you can put pressure on them to increase the quality of their work and to own the things they submit. Bring up specific examples of poor quality work, errors in documents/messages, etc.

Or if you don't care you can just ignore this persons messages.

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#97

Post by carlosjobim »

cool_dude85 wrote: post #66
doctorpangloss wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

let's take the two stories to management: "I'm writing tons of code, and the process is stumbling where the guy whose job it is to review code isn't reviewing it." "I'm not reviewing code." Sometimes I wonder: how does someone go and think so much about their coworkers, and never once think about how they themselves look? Even if I sympathize with the people complaining about their poorly chosen GitHub-based workflow…

Imagine you are a restaurant reviewer. Your job is unquestionably to go to restaurants, order and eat food, and write a review. The restaurant's job is to provide you food to eat and review. You go to a new restaurant, and order some dishes, and one of the plates your server brings out is a big ol pile of dog shit. Who's being anti-social in this situation? The restaurant is doing its job and all they're asking is th…

He's not bringing you a pile of dog shit. He's bringing you some food he went to the restaurant next doors to get. How do you review it?

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#98

Post by emodendroket »

niuzeta wrote: post #34

A very prolific coworker who fully embraced claude has inflicted the team with a flood of AI-generated PRs. About six months later, it is his frequent bemoaning at the standup that their PR don't get reviewed, languishing in inattention. I don't think anyone - including myself - _intentionally_ avoid his PRs. It's just that he doesn't make it easy for the team to look at. This single headline perfectly captures what…

It's not always feasible of course but I think there is real, worthwhile discipline in trying to get change requests small and it matters more with agents. It's very easy to let it balloon into gazillions of files and lines.

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#99

Post by emodendroket »

CoastalCoder wrote: post #47
niuzeta wrote: post #34

A very prolific coworker who fully embraced claude has inflicted the team with a flood of AI-generated PRs. About six months later, it is his frequent bemoaning at the standup that their PR don't get reviewed, languishing in inattention. I don't think anyone - including myself - _intentionally_ avoid his PRs. It's just that he doesn't make it easy for the team to look at. This single headline perfectly captures what…

It sounds like one potential interpretation of his behavior is that he values his own time more than your time. I wonder if that's occurred to him.

Well, what's the solution here, he should ship less stuff?

Re: If you are asking for human attention, demonstrate human effort

#100

Post by emodendroket »

Jimmc414 wrote: post #51
niuzeta wrote: post #34

A very prolific coworker who fully embraced claude has inflicted the team with a flood of AI-generated PRs. About six months later, it is his frequent bemoaning at the standup that their PR don't get reviewed, languishing in inattention. I don't think anyone - including myself - _intentionally_ avoid his PRs. It's just that he doesn't make it easy for the team to look at. This single headline perfectly captures what…

Fight fire with fire. Ask Fable to conduct an adversarial /ultareview of their PR and send the same wall of text back to them. If there are excessive defects, ask them in standup if they actually reviewed the PR themselves before sending it. If there aren’t maybe they are on to something. I think like in law, the human submitting the work is responsible for its quality, not the AI.

I mean frankly this should just be part of the standard process. By the time any person is looking at it there's no reason it should not have gone through an AI review.
Post reply on HN