ai;dr | (ai; didn't read)

Comments

• xpey@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Oh my godd I’m so tired or this shit

  “Uhm actually my field is vey intricate and has a lot of layers than an AI could never replace it…. But yeah your field fucking sucks and I don’t care if it gets replaced with AI.”

  Fuck these fake anti-AI people, if you only defend human writing, but ignore and actively support the end of human art, coding, etc, then you’re part of the problem too

  source

  • Deestan@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Yeah he decides “AI is good actually for coding” but the same reasons apply there.

    LLM code lets people shit out systems with no intent. And those systems are a waste of time. They just feel “90% there” for people who never had to finish a project in their life.

    In the small scale, I get PRs of 200 lines of JS from someone who felt super productive because Claude wrote it for them. What did the JS do? Replicate the CSS “transition” property badly.

    In the large scale, you get thousands of lines of RPC middleware instead of someone saying “hey at this point, should we move this responsibility from module A to module B and get rid of a lot of code?”

    And I refuse to be on the defense of luddite or hater like the author does. Because I have never heard that claim from anyone who is capable of actually shipping stuff better or faster than me.

    source

    • otacon239@lemmy.world ⁨34⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

      This has been going on a lot longer than AI, where the programmer (in this case the AI) isn’t aware that a function that does what you need already exists, it goes making it from scratch. It ends up slower and less stable than the proven function, but they get it to run, so to them it’s a success.

      When I started to get a grasp on programming, I realized early on that I’m rarely solving novel problems and I should seek out to see how it was solved by others before I even begin to write my own approach. I usually find someone has done all the work for me and theirs works better than mine ever would.

      source
• Yaky@slrpnk.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  This reads as vaguely anti-intellectualist.

  I can’t imaging writing code by myself again

  I don’t want to bother with readability, quality, or efficiency. Taking time to think is pointless.

  The less polished and coherent something is, the more value I assign to it.

  Taking time to organize and write my thoughts is pointless. There are plenty of unpolished, incoherent ramblings on the internet, many with ill intent, that should not be given any value. (Yes, I understand that was not the intended meaning, but author should proofread)

  source

  • ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works ⁨20⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

    The less coherent something is the more value I assign to it?? Wtf is wrong with people…

    source
• electrotabby@piefed.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I’ve been thinking about this in the context of research project applications, which often have to be dozens of pages long and every sentence perfectly formulated to show we are competent and tick all the boxes. Now we can just have AI do it. I’m waiting patiently for people to realize this and start an era of post-perfectionism.

  I want my applications to be like this:

  “So we’ve published some papers in clay chemistry now [1-4], and lots of things have been done by others lately [5,6], so i was thinking i could work together with Mike Hunt over at University of Stoneworthingtonham to expand those ideas and also see what happens when you put the clay in an oven. Could we get some cash for that?”

  (Instead of putting the same thing into an AI and have it write it professionally)

  source
• Iconoclast@feddit.uk ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Probably didn’t read it because it was clearly low-quality slop - not because the final output was written by AI.

  People don’t mind AI-generated content when they don’t detect it as such. It’s the low-effort garbage they don’t want to deal with.

  Nobody has a perfect radar for AI content. This is just the good old toupee fallacy in action: “All toupees look terrible because I’ve never seen a good one” - except the good ones are the ones you never clocked as toupees.

  source
• limerod@reddthat.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I was in agreement and had high expectations with the ai;dr abbreviation usage until I read the article.

  For me, writing is the most direct window into how someone thinks, perceives, and groks the world. Once you outsource that to an LLM, I’m not sure what we’re even doing here. Why should I bother to read something someone else couldn’t be bothered to write?

  Agreed. If you cannot put effort into something you want to convey why should I? But, then comes the next paragraphs.

  I’m having a hard time articulating this but AI-generated code feels like progress and efficiency, while AI-generated articles and posts feel low-effort and make the dead internet theory harder to dismiss.

  So, AI assisted coding is progress but AI assisted writing is not? Sounds hypothetical.

  and call me an AI luddite, I use LLMs pretty extensively for work. Claude Code has been tearing into my token budget for months now. I can’t imaging writing code by myself again, specially documentation, tests and most scaffolding.

  You cannot imagine writing code by yourself but expect others to write articles by themselves?

  Growing up, typos and grammatical errors were a negative signal. Funnily enough, that’s completely flipped for me. The less polished and coherent something is, the more value I assign to it.

  But eh, broken English and a lack of capitalization is now just a simple skill away so does it even matter?

  The same can be said for coding. You are getting AI to put the effort instead of doing that yourself. Why should I trust your code? I dislike Vibe coding and LLM generated articles. They lack the authenticity a real person’s work would’ve.

  source
• skip0110@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I’m stealing that post title to use myself

  source