Hacker News Reader

It's kind of like folks wielding gen ai and calling themselves artists.

Questionable output, generally shunned by artisans.

But possibly good enough for some.

Artists are biased when evaluating AI art (same with programmers evaluating AI code).

I'm not so sure. I think it's fair to say that only people who can output good art / code are qualified to evaluate the output of ai.

It's like how product people / C levels have absolutely no understanding of what makes for good code or a good engineering shop (aside from perceived costs.)

"Experts are biased when evaluating non-expert output" is what I would expect and think is probably the correct thing to be

I was thinking more in line “people whose jobs are threatened by technology are biased when evaluating that technology”. Note that I don’t make quality judgement about quality of LLM output.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com