upvote

points

by boplicity10 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby derektank10 hours ago|
next
[-]
>I'm not comfortable with this at all, as giving work to an LLM that a human could do strikes me as wrong

Where does this feeling come from? Is it just because the work is complex? We’re all (excepting maybe the amish) comfortable with using at least some automation, be it mechanical or digital, elsewhere in our lives

reply
upvoteby boplicity9 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Not sure. I don't like LLMs inserting itself into human to human communication, as it can shape our thinking in many ways. Delegating this also makes it much harder for a person to become a subject-matter expert, which is a real loss.
reply
upvoteby loloquwowndueo10 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
> compile factual information based on various search tools it uses. The workflow gets sources, fact checks them, filters them according to my needs, and gives me clean urls for source information to hand off to an editor for writing a short listing.

What’s preventing the editor from using one of your prompts/tooling and replacing you entirely?

There’s zero value in sharing ai-generated output unless your ai has access to something nobody else’s does on which to base things. If all it’s doing is web research you should share your prompt instead. That way people don’t have to deal with ai-written walls of text.

reply
upvoteby boplicity9 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> What’s preventing the editor from using one of your prompts/tooling and replacing you entirely?

Well, they don't have the many other pieces of the business in place that makes this work meaningful. They certainly could try, though. If they succeeded, this aspect wouldn't be what made the difference, though.

reply