570
AI Users Are Working Up to 90 Minutes Longer Every Day, Study Finds (gizmodo.com)
submitted 5 days ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
81 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 52 points 5 days ago (12 children)

And all that time goes to babysitting a text machine... What a life they're living

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 5 days ago* (10 children)

    this is what my company owners don't seem to understand.

    productive employees don't enjoy that. if that becomes our job, will either do it poorly or leave, and then you'll just have shitty people doing it, with shitty results.

    they've backed off a little bit, but they're still trying to push AI tools to do parts of our job that we are still 100% responsible for the outcome of. fuck that.

    actually now that I'm thinking about it, fuck, it fucking pisses me off. like I told them that an application with major value (which also would be one of the easiest things to implement) is just a chatbot that reads the customer spec and you can ask questions, so instead of sorting through hundreds of pages across multiple different files and file types, the chatbot can find anything relevant and then you can look closer at it. do we have that tool? no. are they trying to push other tools on us that are half complete, can't possibly do a good job, and only have marginal time savings? yes. like yeah sure let's fucking let AI do an engineering drawing of a part, I'm sure it'll make it a very nice easy to read drawing that the machine shop will love, and all the senior people who are already reviewing everybody else's work will love to review constant junior level quality work. that's probably their favorite part of the job, reviewing shit quality work. and they love it even more when they know that the feedback they give won't result in somebody getting better at it, they'll just see it again tomorrow.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 4 days ago (4 children)

    The goal is to get to the point where, quite literally, every single job is replaced. The drawings being generated suck now but without organized labor it's going to be hard to argue when they stop sucking.

    Just look at what happened to SWEs

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 4 days ago* (3 children)

    honestly, the more we hire more people, the more I get it

    we used to only hire quality people. we were picky. small company, so everybody there needed to be a contributor. now we just hire to have bodies in chairs and they're noticeably less capable, and half of them sound like AI themselves.

    fuck, I worked with one guy that would actually say "yes, you're right, I was wrong about xyz, it should actually be abc" when you prodded three levels deep to find out how a dumb fuck up happened

    my point is, some of these people absolutely could be replaced by AI and it would have less if an impact than my original estimations

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 4 days ago

    SWE saw the same arc and now were at Andy Yen saying that a humans job isn't to use LLMs to write good code. It's to help LLMs so they can write good code.

    That's what's coming down the pipeline for, quite literally, every single knowledge worker unless something is done.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 child)

    I worked with one guy that would actually say "yes, you're right, I was wrong about xyz, it should actually be abc"

    I think this is what I hate most about rampant LLMs unleashed on the general populace. That kinda phrasing used to just be "effective communication when owning a mistake." But now, like the emdash — (lol), it's abused into a cliche as telltale clanker-speak.

    It erodes trust that, whether right or wrong, you're speaking to an authentic human being.

    My biggest peeve is their constant use of "That's not (anything here), that's positive thing." Lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago*

    I actually did think about taking that out, because I agree, that should be effective communication and I say similar things myself. I don't know how to explain it right now but the way that he said it was exactly like talking to AI, whereas the way I phrase it is more natural. I got two separate opinions on the matter with multiple examples from both myself and the AI bot guy lmfao, and they both agreed that I sounded like a person and the other guy sounded like a bot

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 4 days ago

    they'll just see it again tomorrow

    This is sort of the implied contract of teaching somebody something or reviewing for them. They have to get better over time. If they do not, then I have zero interest spending my time on them. Irrelevant of whether they are a human or an AI.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    You can make that tool in minutes with any agent, just have it tag based off your criteria and run it through a vision model

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 days ago

    I know, that's what pisses me off - they could have had a great return in investment in something simple like that, but nope, that hasn't happened

    and fuck if I'm gonna do it, I have other shit to do. I've got other tools specific to my team's workflow that I don't have time to make.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago (1 child)

    Specific workflow tailored tools seem like the future for the time being. Be the one who makes them rather than having one pushed on you. Even if that means you just make one for yourself.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 4 days ago

    I used to be that person. that time came and went. shame for the company, since there's only one other person in the department that can do that kind of thing. oh well, that was the company's choice.

    yes, I'll make stuff for myself, but only if I really want to, otherwise I'm happy to let things take longer because I wasn't given time to make a tool for the team. not worth the stress, I'd rather go outside.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent