Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | goostavos's commentslogin

If you offload breaking up long sentences to the LLM how will you get better at not writing long sentences?

(as an aside, I also struggle with super long sentences and found a pretty good trick for curing it: rewrite by hand with pen and paper. My cramping hand finds entire passages that the work can survive without)


>no hope for writers like me continuing.

If it's any consolation, I'm releasing a technical book on Java this year. In 2026. When AI exists and, at according to the front page most days, programming is "solved." All of it was written by hand because, well, why else would I bother? What's the point of a craft when you're not the one doing it? Half the joy is getting better at it, and that requires doing.

It's demoralizing to know post-2022 books are devalued in people's minds. It's demoralizing that I also think that way. I spend enough time at work reading other people's copy/pasted LLM output. Books should be a relief from that world, but the risk is unavoidable unless you go back in time.

But hopefully good things rise above the noise. If they don't, it's still OK. Honing a craft is its own reward, even if not celebrated. (this is the lie I tell myself as I lay in bed awake realizing I've wasted that last several years of my life)


Same for domestic partners. They push you into their desktop version for some reason, but the desktop version is a buggy pile of trash. I wasn't able to use it at all even on a windows machine. To their credit, they did refund the software without too much of a hassle (I expected a giant fight).


Agreed. To quote Leslie Lamport, "the hardest part of TLA+ is learning to think abstractly."

There's always a moment, usually annoyingly late in the process, where I realize I've been massively overthinking everything or solving the wrong problem. Time is an essential an ingredient. Clear thinking is extremely hard.

LLMs are definitely useful along the way, but the thinking is the spiritually fulfilling part.


DDB has two use cases:

1. You need an "infinitely scalable" key/value store and have deep pockets[0]

2. you work at AWS and your deployment pipeline has so many stages and regions and fabrics that you can no longer even conceptualize what it means for there to be a "current version" of your software (the hell in which I live).

But for some awful reason it's sold as a general purpose "NoSQL Database." Pair that with the Pavlovian response developers have to the word "scale" and you've got an army of people using the worst possible tech for their usecase. Everyone eventually pairs DDB with Elastic whenever "Oh, wait, so we need to be able to query our data?" hits.

[0] And you ONLY need PK reads. Querying turns "infinite scale" into "infinite throttles."


Agree. I didn’t like being forced to use it. There was some edict based on some different past problems. My service was a devops thing and didn’t really have a data plane. A regular db would have been perfect but would have required some silly high level approval we weren’t willing to get. All that despite being told service teams are free to build how they want


>so distant from daily routine that it seems completely pointless

imo, this is a problem with how it's taught! Order theory is super useful in programming. The main challenge, beyond breaking past that barrier of perceived "pointlessness," is getting away from the totally ordered / "Comparator" view of the world. Preorders are powerful.

It gives us a different way to think about what correct means when we test. For example, state machine transitions can sometimes be viewed as a preorder. And if you can squeeze it into that shape, complicated tests can reduce down to asserting that <= holds. It usually takes a lot of thinking, because it IS far from the daily routine, but by the same rationale, forcing it into your daily routing makes it familiar. It let's you look at tests and go "oh, I bet that condition expression can be modeled as a preorder on [blah]"


Agree. AI is (currently) fantastic at "de-bullshitifying" the internet. "Give me a table that compares Products A & B by z, y, and z." Companies have gone out of their way to make comparison shopping near impossible. Specs are hidden, if they're shown at all. Just figuring out if a certain TV had an ARC-HDMI out required downloading the manual.

I dread the day when ads inevitably make their way into the main AI models. One of the things its currently good at will be destroyed.


But the chatbot will take as a source the comparision data provided by companies! It's very common practice for a company to do some SEO articles with comparing them to their competitor like "FooSoft vs BarSoft", with things like "FooSoft has instant support 24/7, Barsoft has tickets that take 24 hours.."


You do all of that when leaving a comment on HN? Why...?

I'm confused by this need(?) desire(?) to polish things that are irrelevant.


No, I do not, I mentioned asmuch in my post. But I do not hold it against those that do. I think if you want to make a point across, doing this the most effective way without detracting from the point is a good thing.

Relevance is in the eye of the beholder.


No amount of FBI stats about how often "assault" rifles are used will change people's minds. They don't like them and so want to take them away.

I don't know how to square the same people saying we're living under a tyrannical government also pushing legislation that makes sure said tyrannical government is the only one with guns.


I can't square people who think owning a gun will stop or prevent a tyrannical government. Especially when the tyrannical government just leverages its supporters as a vigilante force.


An armed populace creates a huge risk for a federal paramilitary force descending on a municipality with the intent to terrorize the citizens. They're not rolling in with tomahawks and tanks, they're coming in with assault rifles and window breakers.


It won't "stop" them but having to treat everyone like they might shoot back and show up with a 10:1 manpower advantage and armed to the teeth every time you wanna subject someone to state violence really puts a damper on your ability to do tyrannical government things.


The current time period is not proving that out. These are just ammosexual fantasies.


Not at all true. I haven't yet witnessed armed resistance to ICE, but it's in the cards, if the government wants to push. Given the number of veterans and folks that actually have skill with guns in the civilian populace, and the hiring standards of ICE, I think the civilian population, properly mobilized, would be incredibly effective at putting a damper on their illegal behavior.


Have yet to see that so I'm not putting stock in a hypothetical armed uprising.


It's an extremely dangerous line to cross, and it should be avoided if at all possible. At the same time, when no other options are available, it's better to be armed than not. I hope you never have to learn this first-hand.


It kind of is in that they're picking the easy targets. They're not being sloppy in places where wrong address has an unacceptably high (but still small) chance of having them confused for the DEA and shot back at by someone who isn't going to prison one way or another.


The problem with that thinking is that you have to have the will to act to stop tyranny, and no amount of armament will give you the will or the foresight to see it.


Sigh.. same.

The real AI fatigue is the constant background irritation I have when interacting with LLMs.

"You're not imagining it" "You're not crazy" "You're absolutely right!" "Your right to push back on this" "Here's the no fluff, correct, non-reddit answer"


“You’re not [X]—you’re [Y]” is the one that drives me nuts. [X] is typically some negative characterization that, without RLHF, the model would likely just state directly. I get enough politics/subtext from humans. I’d rather the LLM just call it straight.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: