←back to thread

321 points distantprovince | 9 comments | | HN request time: 0.206s | source | bottom
Show context
phito ◴[] No.44617442[source]
I really wish some of my coworkers would stop using LLMs to write me emails or even Teams messages. It does feel extremely rude, to the point I don't even want to read them anymore.
replies(10): >>44617497 #>>44617500 #>>44617658 #>>44617721 #>>44617880 #>>44617940 #>>44618006 #>>44618504 #>>44619441 #>>44622817 #
lxgr ◴[] No.44617940[source]
"Hey, I can't help but notice that some of the messages you're sending me are partially LLM-generated. I appreciate you wanting to communicate stylistically and grammatically correct, but I personally prefer the occasional typo or inelegant expression over the chance of distorted meanings or lost/hallucinated context.

Going forward, could you please communicate with me directly? I really don't mind a lack of capitalization or colloquial expressions in internal communications."

replies(3): >>44619024 #>>44619799 #>>44620829 #
1. pyman ◴[] No.44619024[source]
I see two things people are not happy about when it comes to LLMs:

1. The message you sent doesn't feel personal. It reads like something written by a machine, and I struggle to connect with someone who sends me messages like that.

2. People who don't speak English very well are now sending me perfectly written messages with solid arguments. And honestly, my ego doest’t like it because I used to think I was more intelligent than them. Turns out I wasn't. It was just my perception, based on the fact that I speak the language natively.

Both of these things won't matter anymore in the next two or three years. LLMs will keep getting smarter, while our egos will keep getting smaller.

People still don't fully grasp just how much LLMs will reshape the way we communicate and work, for better or worse.

replies(2): >>44620549 #>>44624745 #
2. throwaway328 ◴[] No.44620549[source]
The word for this, we learned recently, is "LLM inevitabilism". It's often argued for far more convincingly than your attempt here, too.

The future is here, and even if you don't like it, and even if it's worse, you'll take it anyway. Because it's the future. Because... some megalomaniacal dweeb somewhere said so?

When does this hype train get to the next station, so everyone can take a breath? All this "future" has us hyperventilating.

replies(2): >>44620721 #>>44620750 #
3. lxgr ◴[] No.44620721[source]
None of what GP describes is a hypothetical. Present-day LLMs are excellent editors and translators, and for many people, those were the only two things missing for them to be able to present a good idea convincingly.
replies(1): >>44620766 #
4. johnnyanmac ◴[] No.44620750[source]
Probably in a few years. The big Disney lawsuit may be that needle that pops the bubble.

I do agree about this push for inevitable. in small ways this is true. But it doesn't need to take over every aspect of humanity. We have calculators but we still at the very least do basic mental math and don't resort to calculators for 5 + 5. It's been long established as rude to do more than quick glances at your phone when physically meeting people. We leaned against posting google search/wiki links as a response in forums.

Culture still shapes a lot of how we use the modern tools we have.

replies(1): >>44622170 #
5. johnnyanmac ◴[] No.44620766{3}[source]
Just because we have the tech doesn't mean we are forced to use it. we still have social cues and ettiquite shaping what is and isn't appropriate.

In this case, presenting arguments you yourself do not even understand is dishonest, for multiple reasons. And I thought we went past the "thesaurus era" of communication where we just proliferate a comment with uncommon words to sound smarter.

replies(1): >>44620920 #
6. lxgr ◴[] No.44620920{4}[source]
> In this case, presenting arguments you yourself do not even understand is dishonest, for multiple reasons.

I fully agree. However, the original comment was about helping people express an idea in a language they're not proficient in, which seems very different.

> And I thought we went past the "thesaurus era" of communication where we just proliferate a comment with uncommon words to sound smarter.

I wish. Until we are, I can't blame anyone for using tools that level the playing field.

replies(1): >>44621223 #
7. johnnyanmac ◴[] No.44621223{5}[source]
>about helping people express an idea in a language they're not proficient in, which seems very different.

Yes, but I see it as a rare case. Also, consider tha mindset of someone learning a language:

You probably often hear "I'm sorry about my grammar, I'm not very good at English" and their communication is better than half your native peers. They are putting a lot more effort into trying to communicate while the natives take it for granted. That effort shows.

So in the context of an LLM: if they are using it to assist with their communication, they also tend to take more time to look at and properly tweak the output instead of posting it wholesale, at least without the sloppy queries that were not part of the actual output. That effort is why I'm more lenient to those situations.

8. staticautomatic ◴[] No.44622170{3}[source]
Disney is a good one to bet on. They basically have the most sophisticated IP lawyering team in world history.
9. naveen99 ◴[] No.44624745[source]
Small egos have likes and dislikes also.