Hacker News Reader

Comment by whywhywhywhy | Hacker News Reader

I get it’s annoying and I personally hate it but firing someone for it is ridiculous. Are you expecting everyone to rewrite everything from an AI before they share it because that doesn’t sound a good use of company time either.

View on HN

No. I’m expecting everyone to answer direct questions that they are the only one who can answer by thinking up the answer with their own brain then writing or speaking that.

I think that’s not an unreasonable expectation. Don’t share raw LLM output with other people.

If someone asks you a question at work, you answer them, or explain why you won’t/can’t.

If they wanted an AI answer they could have asked it themself.

There are likely hundreds of competent people who don't need AI and who ready and eager to take their place.

Why NOT fire them?

Firing somebody for it is ridiculous? If you say that, then you are also obliged as a customer to keep giving your money to companies who do not perform as expected. You have no right to choose a different lawyer if your lawyer makes an AI-generated report for your case. You have no right to walk past a restaurant which is using AI-generated billboards, you shall eat there.

It’s just a fancy version of previous tools. Imagine a coworker instead does a refactor by grepping the entire codebase and doing a find-and-replace.

Do they ensure that it didn’t accidentally overwrite something it shouldn’t have?

Or do they just throw up a PR and assume their little refactoring bash command works fine, then expect their coworkers to debug it for them?

The 1st one, of course, that is the whole point. AI is increasing the 2nd one by an order of magnitude. People think they shouldn't have to do the 1st one anymore.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com