Comment by blibble
3 days ago
> I've noticed a huge drop in negative comments on HN when discussing LLMs in the last 1-2 months.
real people get fed up of debating the same tired "omg new model 1000x better now" posts/comments from the astroturfers, the shills and their bots each time OpenAI shits out a new model
(article author is a Microslop employee)
Simply this ^ I'm tired of debating bots and people paid to grow the hype, so I won't anymore I'll just work and look for the hype passing by from a distance. In the meanwhile I'll keep waiting for people making actual products with LLMs that will kill old generation products like windows, excel, teams, gmail etc that will replace slop with great ui/ux and push really performant apps
Especially when 90% of these articles are based on personal, anecdotally evidence and keep repeating the same points without offering anything new.
If these articles actually provide quantitative results in a study done across an organization and provide concrete suggestions like what Google did a while ago, that would be refreshing and useful.
(Yes, this very article has strong "shill" vibes and fits the patterns above)
This is a cringe comment from an era of when "Micro$oft" was hip and reads like you are a fanboi for Anthropic/Google foaming at the mouth.
Would be far more useful if you provided actual verifiable information and dropped the cringe memes. Can't take seriously someone using "Microslop" in a sentence".
You're only hurting yourself if you decide there's some wild conspiracy afoot here to pay shills to tell people that coding agents are useful... as opposed to people finding them useful enough to want to tell other people about it.
[flagged]
If I worked for Microsoft as a software engineer and believed that LLMs were going to end software engineering I would not expect the value increase in my stock options to overcome my loss of income when Microsoft inevitably laid me off.
(I do not think LLMs will obsolete software engineering as a career.)
2 replies →
[flagged]
Why is it the people posting positive comments who are "responding to incentives" by posting more, while it's the people posting negative comments who do so by stopping posting? Like, your exact points work equally well with the polarity reversed: the anti-AI influencer/grifter ecosystem is well-developed at this point, and many people desperately want AIs to be useless.
I don't know if the original claim about sentiment is true, but if it is, I don't think yours or blibble's (conflicting) claims about the reason are very believable.
5 replies →