People poorly specifying problems and having bad models of what the other party can know (and then being surprised by the outcome) is certainly a more general albeit mostly separate issue.

▲

ahofmann 2 hours ago | parent [-]

This issue is the main reason why a big percentage of jobs in the world exist. I don't have hard numbers, but my intuition is that about 30% of all jobs are mainly "understand what side a wants and communicate this to side b, so that they understand". Or another perspective: almost all jobs that are called "knowledge work" are like this. Software development is mainly this. Side a are humans, side b is the computer. The main goal of ai seems to get into this space and make a lot of people superflous and this also (partly) explains why everyone is pouring this amount of money into ai.

	▲	PaulRobinson an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Developers are - on average - terrible at this. If they weren't, TPMs, Product Managers, CTOs, none of them would need to exist. It's not specific to software, it's the entire World of business. Most knowledge work is translation from one domain/perspective to another. Not even knowledge work, actually. I've been reading some works by Adler[0] recently, and he makes a strong case for "meaning" only having a sense to humans, and actually each human each having a completely different and isolated "meaning" to even the simplest of things like a piece of stone. If there is difference and nuance to be found when it comes to a rock, what hope have we got when it comes to deep philosophy or the design of complex machines and software? LLMs are not very good at this right now, but if they became a lot better at, they would a) become more useful and b) the work done to get them there would tell us a lot about human communication. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Adler