I’ve always thought that Elon’s “genius” is that he is able to convince smart/capable people to be very loyal to him. I doubt any of his inner circle would comment about him on HN, but I wonder if my theory is correct?
I don’t see an issue with quoting an AI and citing it. Are you defending the parent post’s position of rewriting the AI answer to hide the fact that you used AI to find the solution?
I’m not condoning simply taking the first answer that AI spits back at you and regurgitating that as a response. But if the answer is correct then there’s no need to rewrite it. I just feel that rewriting the answer is trying to hide the fact that you had to use AI to help you find the solution, which to me, is dishonest.
The fact that people vet the AI answer before responding is the value added not the process of rewriting the response to protect frail egos.
> If you really rewrite LLM’s response in your own words, I will know that you have learnt something.
What a waste of time. Do you treat your coworkers like students trying to do homework that you assigned?
> Because if you tell me directly that you have asked Claude, next time I will probably ask Claude directly as I don’t need you.
I should be upfront about the use of AI when providing an answer. You in turn would learn that you can find the solution using AI yourself next time. You learn something and so do I. What is wrong with this interaction?
> That is the reason why doctors wear white and have stethoscope. In many cases people don’t argue with their opinion as they know that doctor had to spend 6 years to earn it. But if they admit LLM as a source they are becoming replaceable.
And don’t get me started with doctors. I hate when someone just tells me to trust them just because they are a professional. If they are worth their salt then they can defend their position without using their costume or degree to intimidate me.
> This is what people who "vote their feelings" would assert. Most people think they are "sophisticated" and "educated" on these issues, both Democrats and Republicans. There is ample evidence that this is not the case for either.
Which begs the question: does democracy still work when voters are so easily misled? I don’t believe that the current generation is fundamentally more or less intelligent than the previous ones. Is technology to blame for disseminating misinformation too rapidly for us to cope?
Companies with high morality, do those even exist? Which one of the big tech companies do you expect to work towards benefiting humanity instead of focusing on turning a profit by any means?
The YouTube video in your link refers to a single Veritasium video regarding their coverage of Waymo autonomous driving. But I feel the entire video is invalidated by the fact that Veritasium clearly mentions that their video is sponsored by Waymo. As a viewer I already know that there will be bias because of this declaration. Veritasium isn’t hiding it, so what’s the issue?
On HN I’d hope to read insightful comments instead of ones making strong statements without justification and asking others to Google for examples. If you’re too lazy to type out them out it’s probably better not to post at all; this is not Reddit.
How am I misquoting you? If you meant to say that Veritasium is frequently incomplete then just say that. No need to add the frequently wrong part at all. You’re implying something much stronger than what you intended; just to sway people’s opinion. But I didn’t need to write this because as you say people can just read your bias.