Hacker News

Heh. Just got done writing (by hand!) a Principles of AI Use document for my (ironically) AI enablement firm, the first of which is:

Write as yourself. You’re being paid for your expertise and insights. Communicate them directly to us. Copying and pasting Claude responses into Slack or an email directly shifts the burden of comprehension and understanding to everyone else, and worse, risks skipping that step for yourself. Even if you’re fundamentally using Claude to gather your thoughts or help you prepare a response, you need to be writing it yourself, in your own voice. Not having Claude ape your voice, or “make it sound less like AI”. You, directly. Doing this will further reinforce your own understanding of the state of things, the same way teaching someone is the best way to learn. As a guideline: for Slack and email comms, this should be near-universally written as you. For deliverables that are longer form and follow a template like proposals, roadmap/discovery work, etc., use of agents is expected but, see Principle #2. (Own the Output.)

I’m not convinced tbh, a lot of my colleagues messages are “x broken” or “I do y” … no context whatsoever, and then I have to coax their context for making these decisions.

Since people started using Claude now I get full context of everything… might be too much sure, but to be honest over-communicating seems better than under-communicating - sure it’s boring and tedious but that shifts the blockage to me.

Otherwise each of these coaxing sessions is something I have to keep in my head until resolved, which is a load in and off itself.

And even better - I can point Claude to that message and gives me a summary. You might say this is silly because we are paying the LLM tax, but knowing what to share, and then verifying against my situation are two different things.

Sometimes they have checked the wrong thing, sometimes they need guidance, sometimes I need to investigate before I can answer. A full LLM message with context is like “summary of their working context that I can resume on my end” so I don’t waste cycles asking or rechecking etc.

And it is still possible to be a learning experience for both of us since the initial message is the start, we can then talk to each other like humans, both much more in sync than before…

It is kinda ironic but I think it does push things in a better direction. Would I have loved it if the message was human, direct and to the point - obviously, but we are all busy, we got shit to do, and this is a useful “resume” mechanic

yes, its all ai writing. A bunch of the metaphors here dont make sense.

"read it all, yes even the bullets. especially the bullets"

if you read one thing from a large wall of text, its gonna be the bullet points, right? thats a big part of what they're for?

"It is the conversational equivalent of forwarding the email."

this is a terrible metaphor. it seems to rely on the idea you would be mad if you sent an email to someone and they forwarded to someone else? but thats useful, theyre literally sending it to someone who is presumably better placed to help you, or raising it to someone more important because they think what youre saying is important

Interesting to note the page also ends with "written by a human, on purpose"

[delayed]

I remember back in the day when you could apply this to Google search results. When I was freelancing, I had a number of people I worked with who would fire off fast questions, but they would still pay me for my time. Then I would return what was essentially a Google search result shortly after. Yes, I would send my own answer, not some paste from Google.

But the point is. They had search, so why didn't they think to do the search? They had the same tools as I did. And yet regularly they couldn't think of the answer. I still deal with this with AI today. When you ask a question, maybe you're asking for the interpretation of the question by the person on the other side. And it's that interpretation that goes to the LLM. Or otherwise some filter of how that person thinks about the question differently than you do.

Same but shorter: https://noslopgrenade.com/

I have a colleague who just paste PR reviews unedited and unread into git. It has been driving people insane and, when people do inplement what it say, straight up degrading the codebase.

This is exactly what I have been feeling in response to this person. They are not contributing. They are creating work for others by pasting every possible problem they can find, most of which are out of scope or context, and letting the requester sort through them which takes hours if you take it seriously.

Some people do and implement everything he asks. They are going way outside the scope of their ticket and fixing every problem in every file they touch. It is chaotic and not good for the codebase because a lot of the problems are repo wide and should not be fixed in isolation.

He doesn't seem to understand why this might bother people or why it takes them so long to respond. He suggested just pulling the comment into Cursor and just asking Cursor to respond...

At that point we are just straight up vibe coding with no human in the loop.

That being said, Cursor's bug bot does a way better job reviewing, and people just ignore it when it asks for something out of scope because it's not a colleague claiming their code is broken.

Luckily I don't have this problem since I am so full of shit that one of the things I still enjoy the most is answering people with my own crap.

Ironically, almost all the content on that page sounds AI generated to me!

just me or does this entire site/text read as 100% LLM generated? extremely ironic if so, they just pasted the AI.

DontMakeWebsitesFullOfObviousAISlopThatComplainAboutUsingAITheIronyIsTooThickForMe.com

same but shorter (already posted on hn): https://gruhn.me/blog/2026-08-03/

Dont be a meat proxy! simple

Actually tbh AI outputs can be pretty good and I have been surprised to see a lack of copy / pastes of them in the format of:

Unique human prompt + AI output which is useful and does a good job expanding on the prompt topic and which when pasted saves people the time of having to go prompt AI on the same topic (fully reviewed by a person before sharing it, to ensure the content has relevance)

Agree that it isn’t nice to just copy & paste, but the assumption that your AI generated answers will the same of someone’s else is wrong. Everyone using AI for a while built a different set of preferences, memories and context in general which influence the answers.

> Don't Paste the AI, please

You're gonna need a stronger language. Why do you think people love AI? If I have to think and god forbid read the response I might as well live in the woods or something

The premise of the article is that everyone has access to the “same tools” but that’s glossing over the specialization inherent in a specific expert’s harness config (memories, skills, rules, repos, etc) that produce actually helpful responses (eg engineer’s view vs product manager’s view).

Sorry this website is too polite.

DO NOT FUCKING PASTE AI RESPONSES TO ME, EVER, PERIOD.

When someone tells me they "talked to Claude" they sound retarded. Just tell me you looked into it, and I fucking swear to god if you just took what Claude said verbatim and do not understand the problem then you are a cunt and I will stop working with you.

When someone pastes LLM output in chat I completely ignore it. I will just continue the conversation as if they said nothing and silently mark them as cretinous in my mind.

This is not up for debate, you will talk to me in short well formed sentences and get to the fucking point or you will fuck off

The article says they could have asked an AI themselves, but that is missing that I may have an agentic context with exactly the right information to answer the question well, which they do not have. For example because I worked on something closely related. Such an agent output is very useful, and taking the time to rewrite that to a short personal answer is not always worth it.

Very ironic this page is full of AI text

Thanks for sharing my little rant again <3 we are looking for translations too!

What if i have used the AI, it answered, but I don't understand the answer?

Unless I'm your research assistant, why would I be asking AI questions for you when you could do it yourself? If you need an answer I already have I will gladly share it with you. If you need my help to find an answer, then tell me that and I gladly will help.

I don’t think it’s that Sol loves to cheat; rather, every GPT model since 5.4 seems to have had that tendency.

Give them a second brain so they don't bother you with silly questions: https://github.com/amaldini/maldalang/blob/main/Examples/Age...

What if English is not your first language and you are afraid of sounding silly when you email or text someone?

This does feel like responding to rudeness with more rudeness. My personal guess would be that people who do this (pasting AI responses) know what they are doing, not genuinely trying to help. It's the equivalent of sending LMGTFY.

Disagree - most people aren't bothered to ask AI and have a conversation with it, they will go to you to get an answer so they have someone to blame when it's wrong.

I don't really seem to be sent very much unfiltered AI output - do other people? I'd love to hear horror stories.

This is like an earlier internet era when it was common for people to just copy-paste directly from other websites into a forum response.

The inverse of this is. Don't ask me a question a 9b llm could have answered.

If you are getting blocks of llm text perhaps it's because you don't deserve their input and could have satisfied your query by not making it someone else's problem.

I think this text also applies well to code written using an LLM.

"written by a human, on purpose."

idk about that

Worst case you just ignore it. Best case there is something useful in it. Shrug.

I don't understand the need of need "Satire, mostly." at the bottom, are opinion on things so dangerous?

People are doing this? Wow, I'm sorry folks.

A much better and straight to the point example is https://noslopgrenade.com

I was recently listening to a podcast about mentalization theory therapy methods for BPD .. for a friend .. Mentalization being the activity of understanding whats going on in other peoples minds, or in ones own. And they idea of pseudomentalizing or "pretend mode" was put forward, where a person looks or sounds like they are .. engaged in mentalizing communication, but are actually checked out. Then I started to think about all the AI slop going around .. and the phenomenon, this meme site is responding to, or AI posting responses.. and I wondered, is this a symptom of.. a global society wide phycological functional deficit, where A) we're none of us communicating as if there is people on the other end.. and B) we're not thinking about our own minds, and taking time to understand things..

[edit] to extend the connections The charm of a messaging board like this is bringing "join attention" to a topic, not just sharing separate monologs.

And also, always wondering if something was written by a human or statistically generated could be seen as Epistemic Hypervigilance, leading to stress, and loss of epistemic trust. This could reduces opportunities for taking on new information of feedback, and cause rigidity and isolation.

Don't be a MEAT PROXY

Similar in spirit: https://stopsloppypasta.ai/en/, discussed a few months ago [1].

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47389570

No. Don't ask a question that AI can answer.

https://dontpastetheai.com/angry/

Almost certainly written by AI

Pasting a blurb of AI is sometimes a form of "Let Me Google That For You" LMGTFY. If someone asks me a dumb question, I will often resort to giving them an AI answer, that they could have easily looked up themselves.

> If you don't have anything to add, it's okay to say so. "No strong opinion here" is a real, helpful reply.

This is really useful, I wish more people would understand this: you don't have to have an opinion on everything. In fact, you probably shouldn't have an opinion on most things.

My own take on the AI issue: https://blog.gpkb.org/posts/just-send-me-the-prompt/

This resonates. Had this in the start of the year with clients sending me their “research”, which, of course, was just a Deep Research result. Lead me to send this article when I work with folks: https://www.marcia.no/words/etiquette

I like to think it helped, but likely what helped was that nobody seems to use Deep Research anymore, haha.

Ironic for this to be full AI Slop.

They did not read AI output, they will not read that page either.

It's the modern era lmgtfy

personally i like editing much more than writing (the scare of the white page or how it was called…)

and i detest ai slop

so my solution is to speak combined with an ai cleanup like macwhisper or wispr flow of all the uhs and ahs and repetitions or rephrasings etc

you can even use ai to pretend a conversation or interview style

then i have stuff to edit

boom

I can really only imagine the social context you would want to use this response in would be inappropriate / anti-social. If you had a well-meaning work colleague send you something AI, sending this back is kind of not a good look. If it's meant to be an education piece we got the memo...

Weirdly, this post speaks for everyone.

This site is AI slop.

Did they really just say "genuinely useful" in a post decrying the blind copy-pasting of AI text? (it's a strong Claude indicator)

lmao love it. Although I'm guilty too though

> A short reply from you beats a long one from a model, every time.

Disagreed. Bad writing from a chatbot beats worse writing from its user every time - regardless of length.

One reason we have so much bot slop is the attractiveness of bad-writing bots to the many people whose writing is even worse.

Okay, boomer.

Beautiful theme. Author has style.

Bollocks, the other person DOES NOT have the same tools as you. They may, but to assume they do is incorrect.