Hacker News Reader

Comment by ako | Hacker News Reader

If the response of AI is sufficient, why would i retype it in my own words? Just a waste of time. Most of what i have AI generate is based on my words and input anyways. I'll often write a draft note, and then have AI generate multiple formats, e.g., technical wording, marketing wording, management wording. Almost like taking raw content and using AI to rephrase it for specific channels.

View on HN

if the response of AI is sufficient to do your job, why do you have a job?

Because the AI isn't autonomous, and cannot vet it's own outputs.

If an AI answers a question perfectly, I'll go with it. But if my boss fires me for no longer being needed because of the AI, good luck to him and his new idiot employee.

If your response when someone asks a job-related question is to paste AI, then you're the one telling your boss that AI can do your job.

Asking questions is part of the job. Answering questions is part of the job. Collaborating with other people is the most important part of the job.

Some junior technical folks early in their career might bristle at this: "my job is to write this code I'm writing, and anything else is a distraction", or something along those lines. It's hard to internalize that your job is actually making the company successful, not yourself, and that means making other people successful.

If you can't answer a human question from a colleague, as a human, then the natural conclusion is that you are unable or unwilling to do the job. Like, great, you can write (or generate) code, what about the other 90% of the job?

I see it differently: if you’re not willing to consider how you could be better/faster/more productive with AI, you’re unwilling to adapt to the future, and not flexible enough. You’re going to slow down your employer. Most business text does not benefit from a user spending time on phrasing it, it’s not literature.

> if you’re not willing to consider how you could be better/faster/more productive with AI, you’re unwilling to adapt to the future, and not flexible enough. You’re going to slow down your employer

That's for their manager to judge. You can maybe share your opinion on the matter, and let them decide. Until then, collaboration is more important than your personal IC work, and usually more effective than 1 person working heads-down and another struggling.

Newer devs invariably discover that the "write the code" part of the job is just a small part of being an engineer, and less value-added than collaboration. Big successes are achieved when you make others successful, rather than isolating yourself and focusing only on your own work and your own success.

This is not counter collaboration, collaboration can also benefit from the use of AI.

AI is not a suitable substitute for collaboration – we are discussing the case of sending AI summaries (1 human asking, 1 LLM answering through a meat proxy), instead of collaboration between 2 humans

As I said the response of AI is very much based on the input and context i give it. It’s not like everyone gets exactly the same answers from AI. Ai is a tool that I control.

Also, if the response of AI is sufficient, what is the added value of you spending more time on it?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com