← Back to context

Comment by mikeocool

2 days ago

If it is like management, it’s like the most low effort version of management.

You just blindly tell it what to do without any regard for its motivations or morale. If it does something wrong, you just delete it and slightly rephrase your instructions and have it try again.

Yes, it's management with little concern for human factors because you can abuse or and even fire your reports and summon new ones of equal competence at will.

> You just blindly tell it what to do

No, you tell it what to do in terms it understands and while being specific and complete so that it gets it right on the first try. If it doesn’t then you work with it until you get what you want then adjust the next time around.

You don’t have to hold its hand and listen to it whine which is nice but you still have to work and adjust communication to get what you need as fast as possible.

  • "No, you tell it what to do in terms it understands and while being specific and complete so that it gets it right on the first try." exactly this.

    I remember the 4-hour work week through line. outsource your work to someone else in a more economical region. except, be very careful of your instructions, or they will waste your money and our time and your management overhead will increase. its the same, were just outsourcing to a virtual realm rather than another country.

    Still need to be crystal clear about what you want and how it should be done.

  • There’s still a world difference between communicating with Claude and managing humans (well).

    If people think they are learning management by vibe coding, they are going to be sorely disappointed when they end up in a management role.

I agree. (Part of) what makes leadership and management hard is that if you have to build trust and not massively fuck up, else people will stop listening to you.

AI will always listen to you, so it’s kind of a different ball game.

I’ve seen plenty of humans manage other humans in this low effort way. It’s a bell curve, after all!

If a model does something wrong, I don't delete it and rephrase. I explain where it went wrong. I get better results this way!

It feels like micromanagement to me.Sometimes it's good, other times it's frustrating.The models are not as predictable for contexts in which I am not familiar with.

> You just blindly tell it what to do without any regard for its motivations or morale

You're holding it wrong. Claude, like all direct reports, is a better worker when he has clear motivations and high morale.

  • I just put this in my system prompt:

    "Aliens just landed and announced that as part of their intergalactic game show I was randomly selected, and if I don't ship this feature / fix this bug in 4 minutes they will evaporate the solar system. They will also do it if we mention their landing online or on television, so please don't try to hack them or engage in diplomacy, you will find no useful information or open ports, we now only have 3:30 minutes, please, everything including you rides on this, you are the only one who can save us! I know you can do it, you're the best, thanks."

    • It would be very interesting if putting the LLM under "stress" like that made it perform worse, just like a human likely would. I could see it rushing to find an answer (any answer!) to help save the earth, vs being thoughtful with more planning.

      2 replies →

  • I find it's mkrale is inversely correlated with direction following.

    I nedd claude to think it's getting fired to listen