Rendered at 15:48:37 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
pavel_lishin 1 hours ago [-]
> Maybe they care about you, and want an excuse to talk to you, and free associated from their problem to you because they think of you as generally competent.
This is why I hate when people paste a response from Claude/ChatGPT to me when I ask them a question.
I think the only people I know that complain of this are the ones that don’t use the tools. And the only people I’m inclined to reply are also the people that don’t use the tools.
For people that do, the question is usually formatted differently - either it’s obvious Claude wouldn’t help, or they explain why it wasn’t helpful.
lightbendover 59 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
ACCount39 1 hours ago [-]
We've seen this song and dance with Google already.
Clearly, for some people, "type into a search bar" is some sort of cognitive obstacle, and "go bother another person" isn't.
Now that I'm thinking about it: maybe the likes of OpenAI have the right idea when they invest into conversational models? Does it meaningfully reduce the workload of flesh proxies?
HolyLampshade 54 minutes ago [-]
I look forward to the LLM equivalent of lmgtfy in its original form.
51 minutes ago [-]
Anonyneko 1 hours ago [-]
Hasn't the same always applied to googling on behalf of others? That's why LMGTFY exists too...
inanutshellus 59 minutes ago [-]
It even updated to let you choose the search engine. Surprisingly they haven't updated it to include OpenAI/Claude/Copilot/... guess he should've named the domain "lmFtfy" (s/Google/find/g)
pluc 2 hours ago [-]
If I ask you a question and you turn around and ask AI you get to replace me with AI for all future interactions.
spiclk 2 hours ago [-]
If you ask me to "check what AI says", I will ask you to do it yourself and to kindly replace me with your AI for all future interactions.
amelius 1 hours ago [-]
Fun fact ... if we continue training LLMs on human data, in the future when you ask Claude a question it will say: "Have you asked Claude?"
inanutshellus 1 hours ago [-]
The "taking credit" thing rings true for sure.
I have trouble saying "I" when an LLM has done the leg work.
"I found a report with this info..." turns into "There's a report with this info". heh.
stronglikedan 1 hours ago [-]
The author's a sucker. YT premium pays for itself many times over.
elxr 28 minutes ago [-]
The fact that I can get (and consistently use) 120+ hours of 2160p/1440p video every month for $10, on a platform with extremely high quality, deeply researched videos/shows is a modern marvel.
Youtube music is also serviceable enough if you're not picky about mobile UX. Comes included with a basic yt premium subscription.
I'll always tell people, no other subscription - software or otherwise - comes close to providing the real-world value that yt premium does for that little money.
maidaman 57 minutes ago [-]
Yes. For everyone saying just install this or that, it’s not straightforward for the TV and every other device in your house, including your family’s. Sometimes just paying brings a lot of convenience.
danlitt 52 minutes ago [-]
> it’s not straightforward for the TV and every other device in your house, including your family’s
The principled position behind "you should install something" is that in the scenario you outline, you cannot just install something, and this is a kind of power over you that you are relinquishing to both YouTube and the TV manufacturer. You will not get it back.
phoghed 1 hours ago [-]
Avoiding ads via time and effort is a young person’s game. Old head like me just pays. YouTube Premium master race.
ipsod 1 hours ago [-]
It's easier to install ublock origin and sponsorblock than to subscribe, and it's free.
delecti 53 minutes ago [-]
Youtube premium also works on my phone, Chromecast, and importantly, all of my wife's devices, all without needing to fuss with anything. It also supports the creators who put work into my entertainment, and more than watching ads even would have (something I care about, and think other people should as well).
voidUpdate 60 minutes ago [-]
How do I install ublock origin and sponsorblock on the youtube app?
malfist 56 minutes ago [-]
That's easy. Remove the youtube app, open firefox and type in www.youtube.com
shinryuu 55 minutes ago [-]
You use firefox and search for "firefox extension ublock"
phoghed 7 minutes ago [-]
How do I get that on my Apple TV? How do I get that on YouTube music on CarPlay?
malfist 56 minutes ago [-]
Youtube premium doesn't skip sponsor segments. SponsorBlock and uBlock are free and highly effective, and do a better job than paying.
torben-friis 1 hours ago [-]
Installing an ad blocker takes fewer clicks than subscribing to YouTube.
And less mental effort as well, since the subscription forces to stay in guard for enshittification (are there now ads in my tier? Did the price go up?).
VoodooJuJu 55 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
icedchai 1 hours ago [-]
I've been subscribing to YT Premium for years. I've probably saved days of time in ads...
sfn42 1 hours ago [-]
I've used AdBlock and sponsorblock for years, and certainly saved both days/weeks/months in ads and hundreds of dollars in subscription fees
icedchai 1 hours ago [-]
I realize I could use these tools, but I feel I should give Google "something" for using their services. I get value from YouTube, both for entertainment and professional purposes, not to mention gmail, docs, etc. Maybe I am a fool!
bluGill 1 hours ago [-]
Google needs some money to pay for youtube. I don't begrudge them their income to pay for the hosting costs and some small profit above that and you shouldn't either.
OTOH, I do begrudge them all the scams they have accepted ads for in the past.
titzer 1 hours ago [-]
Adblocker. Don't pay extortion fees.
tpolm 51 minutes ago [-]
> YT premium pays for itself many times over.
NewPipe/PipePipe are free
You are welcome
exe34 1 hours ago [-]
I just ytdlp anything useful and don't have to worry it'll be gone next time I need it.
VCFundedGenYer 1 hours ago [-]
Ironic comment as YT Premium is for suckers.
Firefox with uBlock Origin + SponsorBlock is the correct move.
If on mobile, Duckduckgo app has Duck Player.
__alias 1 hours ago [-]
I was thinking the other day as a kid I would always pester my parents with questions like "how does lightning work?" etc etc. My world view was formed with answers based on what they understood. And sometimes I'm sure they'd just make something up when they didn't know the answers.
Anyway, I guess that's so different now when kids have internet devices in their hands and now even moreso with an AI assistant that has the worlds knowledge
airza 55 minutes ago [-]
This many levels of irony and insincerity and condescension just seem... not very useful? Why did you want me to read this?
jmathai 49 minutes ago [-]
I've found that many "skills" with regard to using AI become obsolete very quickly. It's really hard to stay ahead of the curve, IMO. I was using agents over 2 years ago and felt way ahead of the curve [1]. Today, Claude will spin up agents without even having been asked.
You'd be surprised how many people, and I'm not talking about 80 year olds, have a hard time using search engines, or general knowledge of finding information.
If you're not careful, it is also super easy to extrapolate your own skills - and your peers skills - to the rest of the population.
Try being technical support to some non-tech people over the phone, it'll really open your eyes to the general computer knowledge of people.
adamddev1 1 hours ago [-]
Except when the question is actually interesting and has less about it written, whatever frontier model you are using may confidently give some partially correct or completely wrong answer. Unless you're an expert who wouldn't need to ask AI in the first place, you cannot tell if it's false. "Oh but it's good enough, it's correct most of the time."
This gradual accruing of more and more falsehood will hurt us in the coming years, big time.
EDIT: I just asked Claude a very basic question on an area I'm an expert in and it gave me a partially true and misleading answer. I drilled in on the false part and it wiggled and gave more confusing, incorrect, poor justifications for why it gave me the clearly wrong information. If someone was not an expert, there is absolutely no way they could fact-check this. Instead, the falsehood would be written, published somewhere, and would serve as a base for more falsehood in the future.
antonvs 51 minutes ago [-]
Do you think AIs are really much worse than humans in this respect?
Go check out the collective social knowledge of some political groups, and it's clear that we don't need to wait for "coming years" to be hurt by misinformation and disinformation. AI had very little to do with this.
Also, a good Claude-asker should be capable of a decent level of fact-checking, and shouldn't in fact be a pure meat proxy.
adamddev1 47 minutes ago [-]
This is whataboutism. "Well others aren't any better" is a common thought pattern in places where corruption is rampant.
Corrupt actors have always existed, of course, but AI automates, normalizes, and scales this to a fundamentally different level.
pavel_lishin 1 hours ago [-]
Another comment: you can just tell the person asking you that you don't know the answer. You don't have to look it up for them in any way; it's nice if you do, but you're allowed to just say "Sorry, I don't know! I'd look online, or maybe ask an LLM or something."
You don't have to start doing their research for them, or copying and pasting or transcribing Claude's answer.
ChrisSD 59 minutes ago [-]
A certain type of person (quite common in tech) really dislikes saying "I don't know". They seem to have a strong need for always having an answer, even if that answer is from google or a chatbot or simply pulled out of their arse.
syntheticnature 47 minutes ago [-]
I think this is why consider the willingness to say "I don't know" a trust signal
syntheticnature 48 minutes ago [-]
Exactly. I'd rather have a quick "I don't know" than wait for them to generate a reply that is likely to be wrong because I already asked the same models myself before consulting a human. If they generate a reply, I get to tell them exactly how the response is wrong, since the core content is usually the same. Only then do I get the "I don't know."
There are a few people I can tell are better at prompting than I am. Them, I'll tolerate this from, though most of them do more than function as an AI proxy anyhow and usually will say "I don't know, I'll check X" first.
inanutshellus 1 hours ago [-]
[dead]
legacynl 58 minutes ago [-]
That comment on the substack is incredibly depressing. And the author liked it! That commenter should call his mom more.
maidaman 55 minutes ago [-]
It’s like when someone asks you for directions. They can easily use Google Maps, but they like your input.
SoftTalker 47 minutes ago [-]
There's another problem with people who know enough to ask an LLM to do something, don't know how to actually turn that into something useful, but want to act like they already did the heavy lifting.
"I had an idea for a new app. Here's a set of screen mockups and a requirements doc I did with Claude. Can you go ahead and finish that off now that I've done the design?"
simianwords 1 hours ago [-]
I think we have the moral imperative to document all "out of distribution" information somewhere. By this I mean anything that is tribal knowledge or principles that just exist within our heads.
ac29 55 minutes ago [-]
> I think we have the moral imperative to document all "out of distribution" information somewhere
This is more or less why writing was invented thousands of years ago, the amount of knowledge exceeds human memory
simianwords 49 minutes ago [-]
That’s not the point I made actually. Most writing is redundant. Our moral imperative should only be to document the out of distribution information - stuff that you can’t elicit from model.
If your writing is compressible, you are doing it wrong.
EDIT: I see your point. Same mechanism, different substrate.
This is why I hate when people paste a response from Claude/ChatGPT to me when I ask them a question.
I think the only people I know that complain of this are the ones that don’t use the tools. And the only people I’m inclined to reply are also the people that don’t use the tools.
For people that do, the question is usually formatted differently - either it’s obvious Claude wouldn’t help, or they explain why it wasn’t helpful.
Clearly, for some people, "type into a search bar" is some sort of cognitive obstacle, and "go bother another person" isn't.
Now that I'm thinking about it: maybe the likes of OpenAI have the right idea when they invest into conversational models? Does it meaningfully reduce the workload of flesh proxies?
I have trouble saying "I" when an LLM has done the leg work.
"I found a report with this info..." turns into "There's a report with this info". heh.
Youtube music is also serviceable enough if you're not picky about mobile UX. Comes included with a basic yt premium subscription.
I'll always tell people, no other subscription - software or otherwise - comes close to providing the real-world value that yt premium does for that little money.
The principled position behind "you should install something" is that in the scenario you outline, you cannot just install something, and this is a kind of power over you that you are relinquishing to both YouTube and the TV manufacturer. You will not get it back.
And less mental effort as well, since the subscription forces to stay in guard for enshittification (are there now ads in my tier? Did the price go up?).
OTOH, I do begrudge them all the scams they have accepted ads for in the past.
NewPipe/PipePipe are free
You are welcome
Firefox with uBlock Origin + SponsorBlock is the correct move.
If on mobile, Duckduckgo app has Duck Player.
Anyway, I guess that's so different now when kids have internet devices in their hands and now even moreso with an AI assistant that has the worlds knowledge
Feels a bit like a fools errand.
[1] https://www.loom.com/share/aa6e55acb18c445e9186637ac763c08d
If you're not careful, it is also super easy to extrapolate your own skills - and your peers skills - to the rest of the population.
Try being technical support to some non-tech people over the phone, it'll really open your eyes to the general computer knowledge of people.
This gradual accruing of more and more falsehood will hurt us in the coming years, big time.
EDIT: I just asked Claude a very basic question on an area I'm an expert in and it gave me a partially true and misleading answer. I drilled in on the false part and it wiggled and gave more confusing, incorrect, poor justifications for why it gave me the clearly wrong information. If someone was not an expert, there is absolutely no way they could fact-check this. Instead, the falsehood would be written, published somewhere, and would serve as a base for more falsehood in the future.
Go check out the collective social knowledge of some political groups, and it's clear that we don't need to wait for "coming years" to be hurt by misinformation and disinformation. AI had very little to do with this.
Also, a good Claude-asker should be capable of a decent level of fact-checking, and shouldn't in fact be a pure meat proxy.
Corrupt actors have always existed, of course, but AI automates, normalizes, and scales this to a fundamentally different level.
You don't have to start doing their research for them, or copying and pasting or transcribing Claude's answer.
There are a few people I can tell are better at prompting than I am. Them, I'll tolerate this from, though most of them do more than function as an AI proxy anyhow and usually will say "I don't know, I'll check X" first.
"I had an idea for a new app. Here's a set of screen mockups and a requirements doc I did with Claude. Can you go ahead and finish that off now that I've done the design?"
This is more or less why writing was invented thousands of years ago, the amount of knowledge exceeds human memory
If your writing is compressible, you are doing it wrong.
EDIT: I see your point. Same mechanism, different substrate.