@glyph Did you quote post something?
-
@glyph The addictive behavior isn't new, I've flagged it before. There is also a reason the meetup is called Claude Code Anonymous. What puzzles me is how dismissive people still are of LLMs, despite the mounting evidence to the contrary. I thought at this point we would be past that.
-
@glyph This feels about right, and with this, the next trick is building a culture of healing and support for when those who have fallen prey to this addiction are ready for change.
@mttaggart @glyph
not exactly on the spot but close to it on "culture of healing" i'd say, it speaks of "recovering prompt writers", don't know if you read this marvelous, lenghty piece: https://sightlessscribbles.com/the-colonization-of-confidence/ ? -
@glyph The addictive behavior isn't new, I've flagged it before. There is also a reason the meetup is called Claude Code Anonymous. What puzzles me is how dismissive people still are of LLMs, despite the mounting evidence to the contrary. I thought at this point we would be past that.
@mitsuhiko [citation needed]
-
@mitsuhiko [citation needed]
@mitsuhiko my assertion is that there's no evidence they're useful. There's LOADS of evidence that people SUBJECTIVELY FEEL that they are useful, but that is not the same thing. I subjectively feel that they are destructive and waste time. If you want to proceed past this disagreement you are going to need to bring methodologically credible evidence.
-
@mitsuhiko [citation needed]
@glyph I mean, I don't know what to tell you. Are you still really doubting that these things are useful? I've written so many times about this now, are you dismissing it? I can point you to code that I've written over the last seven days that in terms of complexity and utility, is way beyond what we've been able to push out over Christmas. (eg: https://github.com/mitsuhiko/tankgame which is public)
Like, how can you doubt this? It just boggles my mind.
-
@glyph Before I would often spend an hour or more fighting the nightmare that is the android build system before finding an incantation like implementation('com.google.guava:guava:32.1.3-jre') { exclude group: 'com.google.j2objc', module: 'j2objc-annotations' } on stack overflow with an explanation that this is the only way to include libraries foo and bar in the same project. Now an llm can immediately fix this for me, and I no longer dream about including violence on whoever invented gradle.
-
@datarama @xgranade I have other anxiety issues (OCD does not really resonate broadly, but anxiety+ADHD can produce a similar effect) and I sometimes feel waves of INTENSE rage when I open up my Apple TV and it's playing a loud trailer for a show I don't really want to get into, or launch Steam and find that it's forgotten the preference to open to the Library and not Store tab. We need strict regulation for ALL of these attractive "algorithmic" nuisances
-
-
@glyph I mean, I don't know what to tell you. Are you still really doubting that these things are useful? I've written so many times about this now, are you dismissing it? I can point you to code that I've written over the last seven days that in terms of complexity and utility, is way beyond what we've been able to push out over Christmas. (eg: https://github.com/mitsuhiko/tankgame which is public)
Like, how can you doubt this? It just boggles my mind.
@mitsuhiko amazing. you plagiarized a game-jam game in about the amount of time that a game jam usually takes to run. truly our society will be revolutionized
-
@mitsuhiko amazing. you plagiarized a game-jam game in about the amount of time that a game jam usually takes to run. truly our society will be revolutionized
@glyph Please tell me what is plagiarized and also no I wouldn't be able to do it without an LLM over Christmas while also working on actual work. I just couldn't have done it. You might be able to. I can't. And that's a pretty big difference.
-
Being close with someone who has gone through arduous kratom detoxes more than once, it became something I would not touch for love nor money.
I don't care if it is "natural" -- I've seen it wreck people's lives. I would never blame an addict, but there are definitely many readily-available pitfalls in the world, and peer pressure is a thing, even with adults.
Having seen starry-eyed, vacant-looking acquaintances rave about LLMs as the new messiah or some such sh*t, I avoid those assiduously as well. Too culty! It won't turn out well.
-
@glyph Please tell me what is plagiarized and also no I wouldn't be able to do it without an LLM over Christmas while also working on actual work. I just couldn't have done it. You might be able to. I can't. And that's a pretty big difference.
@mitsuhiko re: plagiarism: of course I can't tell you exactly what was plagiarized here. it's *extremely* hard to even track provenance of what an LLM's 'inspiration' was, let alone to determine specifically if it made a sufficiently exact replication of training data that direct copyright litigation would be feasible. you don't know who contributed the training data that made this work possible. in my opinion, it's inherently plagiarism.
-
@mitsuhiko re: plagiarism: of course I can't tell you exactly what was plagiarized here. it's *extremely* hard to even track provenance of what an LLM's 'inspiration' was, let alone to determine specifically if it made a sufficiently exact replication of training data that direct copyright litigation would be feasible. you don't know who contributed the training data that made this work possible. in my opinion, it's inherently plagiarism.
@mitsuhiko re: you "couldn't have done it", sure, maybe. that's subjective! which is the exact thing that I said would not move the argument forward. so you're just performing an argument from incredulity here. here's a counterpoint: I asked an LLM to help me with a data structure problem and wasted about a week on useless garbage output. We are now at net zero utility between the two of us, Q.E.D.
-
@mitsuhiko re: you "couldn't have done it", sure, maybe. that's subjective! which is the exact thing that I said would not move the argument forward. so you're just performing an argument from incredulity here. here's a counterpoint: I asked an LLM to help me with a data structure problem and wasted about a week on useless garbage output. We are now at net zero utility between the two of us, Q.E.D.
@mitsuhiko this is the definition of sample bias (which I did my level best to explain in exhaustive detail in https://blog.glyph.im/2025/08/futzing-fraction.html ). It wastes time sometimes, it saves time sometimes, it helps with learning sometimes, it helps with anti-learning misinformation and incorrect conceptual models sometimes. Is it a net benefit or not? I don't think it is, but I can't prove it! It's kinda incumbent upon boosters at this point, given all the info we now have on its risks!
-
@mitsuhiko re: you "couldn't have done it", sure, maybe. that's subjective! which is the exact thing that I said would not move the argument forward. so you're just performing an argument from incredulity here. here's a counterpoint: I asked an LLM to help me with a data structure problem and wasted about a week on useless garbage output. We are now at net zero utility between the two of us, Q.E.D.
@glyph You’re arguing against a strange strawman. On the one hand, you claim this is useless; on the other, when I point out that it’s useful to me and show concrete output that has been genuinely valuable, you dismiss it as something else entirely, and apparently plagiarism.
I get the impression that this is upsetting to you, or that you're simply uncomfortable with people using it. What puzzles me is the complete disregard for the evidence being presented, because at this point it doesn't seem grounded in reality.
I think there's nothing I could tell you that would convince you that this is useful to me.
-
@glyph You’re arguing against a strange strawman. On the one hand, you claim this is useless; on the other, when I point out that it’s useful to me and show concrete output that has been genuinely valuable, you dismiss it as something else entirely, and apparently plagiarism.
I get the impression that this is upsetting to you, or that you're simply uncomfortable with people using it. What puzzles me is the complete disregard for the evidence being presented, because at this point it doesn't seem grounded in reality.
I think there's nothing I could tell you that would convince you that this is useful to me.
@mitsuhiko I find it upsetting because you're strolling right past all the points I'm making, ignoring the parameters I tried to set on the discussion, and embodying the EXACT THING that I pointed out in the top post. I said that LLM users say "sure it has problems, but I can handle them". And you are responding to that by saying that you've pointed out the addictive tendencies but you still use it because you see benefits. That's the thing that I was saying! That's my worry!
-
@mitsuhiko re: plagiarism: of course I can't tell you exactly what was plagiarized here. it's *extremely* hard to even track provenance of what an LLM's 'inspiration' was, let alone to determine specifically if it made a sufficiently exact replication of training data that direct copyright litigation would be feasible. you don't know who contributed the training data that made this work possible. in my opinion, it's inherently plagiarism.
@glyph @mitsuhiko The way to avoid plagarizing is simple: stop using AI, and use your own damn brain.
2026 is the year of the human, didn't you hear?
-
@datarama @xgranade I have other anxiety issues (OCD does not really resonate broadly, but anxiety+ADHD can produce a similar effect) and I sometimes feel waves of INTENSE rage when I open up my Apple TV and it's playing a loud trailer for a show I don't really want to get into, or launch Steam and find that it's forgotten the preference to open to the Library and not Store tab. We need strict regulation for ALL of these attractive "algorithmic" nuisances
-
@mitsuhiko I find it upsetting because you're strolling right past all the points I'm making, ignoring the parameters I tried to set on the discussion, and embodying the EXACT THING that I pointed out in the top post. I said that LLM users say "sure it has problems, but I can handle them". And you are responding to that by saying that you've pointed out the addictive tendencies but you still use it because you see benefits. That's the thing that I was saying! That's my worry!
@mitsuhiko As far as the strawman, let me try to explain again. If I have said it's "useless" (a word I try not to use, but I might slip up here and there—in this discussion, I describe it as *having produced* useless output for me, which is just a literal thing that happened, not a description of the model overall) what I am referring to is the *overall cost/benefit* not necessarily being positive.
-
@glyph Please tell me what is plagiarized and also no I wouldn't be able to do it without an LLM over Christmas while also working on actual work. I just couldn't have done it. You might be able to. I can't. And that's a pretty big difference.
@mitsuhiko @glyph And cocaine can give you a lot of energy. What's your point?