You must log in or register to comment.
Oh my godd I’m so tired or this shit
“Uhm actually my field is vey intricate and has a lot of layers than an AI could never replace it… But yeah your field fucking sucks and I don’t care if it gets replaced with AI.”
Fuck these fake anti-AI people, if you only defend human writing, but ignore and actively support the end of human art, coding, etc, then you’re part of the problem too
I’ve worked a number of jobs in TV, most behind the scenes. I’ve long said most of those jobs people at home wouldn’t know exist unless I make a mistake. That does not mean they were simple jobs.
Many people do not understand the amount of work that goes into other jobs they have never done, nor do they understand what makes someone good at that job.
The only good job AI can replace is the CEO as it doesn’t get the urge to rape kids
As someone else, somewhere else, said, people seem to be ok with AI making the work they don’t actually know, but can easily pinpoint where AI has its limitations and routinely make mistakes when it’s the fields they’re actually knowledgable about.
So the problem is people champion the use of AI where they’re not directly affected because they look at other people’s work as less valuable, more easily replaceable, but theirs is suddenly too complex for AI to get it right.
Yeah he decides “AI is good actually for coding” but the same reasons apply there.
(Note: Non-coders prototyping is a different use case than professional coding - I am talking about professional coding here)
LLM code lets people shit out systems with no intent. And those systems are a waste of time. They just feel “90% there” for people who never had to finish a project in their life.
In the small scale, I get PRs of 200 lines of JS from someone who felt super productive because Claude wrote it for them. What did the JS do? Replicate the CSS “transition” property badly. They could have written one line instead. And gotten a bug-free, efficient, readable and maintainable version of what they were trying to do instead.
In the large scale, you get thousands of lines of RPC middleware instead of someone saying “hey at this point, should we move this responsibility from module A to module B and get rid of a lot of code?”
And I refuse to be on the defense of luddite or hater like the author does. Because I have never heard that claim from anyone who is capable of actually shipping stuff better or faster than me.
This has been going on a lot longer than AI, where the programmer (in this case the AI) isn’t aware that a function that does what you need already exists, it goes making it from scratch. It ends up slower and less stable than the proven function, but they get it to run, so to them it’s a success.
When I started to get a grasp on programming, I realized early on that I’m rarely solving novel problems and I should seek out to see how it was solved by others before I even begin to write my own approach. I usually find someone has done all the work for me and theirs works better than mine ever would.
This reads as vaguely anti-intellectualist.
I can’t imaging writing code by myself again
I don’t want to bother with readability, quality, or efficiency. Taking time to think is pointless.
The less polished and coherent something is, the more value I assign to it.
Taking time to organize and write my thoughts is pointless. There are plenty of unpolished, incoherent ramblings on the internet, many with ill intent, that should not be given any value. (Yes, I understand that was not the intended meaning, but author should proofread)
The less coherent something is the more value I assign to it?? Wtf is wrong with people…
It’s because you usually won’t find a typo in an LLM-generated post, like you can in a human-written one.
Sounds more like anti-intellectualism if you ask me.
Only if they’re sloppy.
The LLMs make mistakes too, though. They’re trained on stuff they skimmed on the net, and they make a lot of “Americanism” mistakes: pluralizing mass nouns like cinnamon and email with an S; ‘thru’ and other lazy abbreviations; spelling words like ‘labour’ without one letter; pay ‘check’(checked;still there). The list goes on.
Some of those won’t be discernible by an American recipient, but the rest of the world sees it. It sticks out like a “see below list” and a “how it’s like” and we see the rot.
So you’re saying they should polish their text to make it more coherent? Huh.
I’ve been thinking about this in the context of research project applications, which often have to be dozens of pages long and every sentence perfectly formulated to show we are competent and tick all the boxes. Now we can just have AI do it. I’m waiting patiently for people to realize this and start an era of post-perfectionism.
I want my applications to be like this:
“So we’ve published some papers in clay chemistry now [1-4], and lots of things have been done by others lately [5,6], so i was thinking i could work together with Mike Hunt over at University of Stoneworthingtonham to expand those ideas and also see what happens when you put the clay in an oven. Could we get some cash for that?”
(Instead of putting the same thing into an AI and have it write it professionally)
I was in agreement and had high expectations with the ai;dr abbreviation usage until I read the article.
For me, writing is the most direct window into how someone thinks, perceives, and groks the world. Once you outsource that to an LLM, I’m not sure what we’re even doing here. Why should I bother to read something someone else couldn’t be bothered to write?
Agreed. If you cannot put effort into something you want to convey why should I? But, then comes the next paragraphs.
I’m having a hard time articulating this but AI-generated code feels like progress and efficiency, while AI-generated articles and posts feel low-effort and make the dead internet theory harder to dismiss.
So, AI assisted coding is progress but AI assisted writing is not? Sounds hypocritical.
and call me an AI luddite, I use LLMs pretty extensively for work. Claude Code has been tearing into my token budget for months now. I can’t imaging writing code by myself again, specially documentation, tests and most scaffolding.
You cannot imagine writing code by yourself but expect others to write articles by themselves?
Growing up, typos and grammatical errors were a negative signal. Funnily enough, that’s completely flipped for me. The less polished and coherent something is, the more value I assign to it.
But eh, broken English and a lack of capitalization is now just a simple skill away so does it even matter?
The same can be said for coding. You are getting AI to put the effort instead of doing that yourself. Why should I trust your code? I dislike Vibe coding and LLM generated articles. They lack the authenticity a real person’s work would’ve.
Sounds hypothetical.
You mean hypocritical, I guess
Yes, autocorrect!
Probably didn’t read it because it was clearly low-quality slop - not because the final output was written by AI.
People don’t mind AI-generated content when they don’t detect it as such. It’s the low-effort garbage they don’t want to deal with.
Nobody has a perfect radar for AI content. This is just the good old toupee fallacy in action: “All toupees look terrible because I’ve never seen a good one” - except the good ones are the ones you never clocked as toupees.
I’m stealing that post title to use myself
