| ▲ | why_at 4 hours ago |
| I can appreciate LLMs for some use cases, but writing emails for the user is the one that really baffles me. It's one thing if you don't speak English well and could use some help making yourself understood, but the amount of native speakers using this is so strange to me. How does this help you? If you can write to the LLM telling it what kind of email to write, you might as well just write the email. |
|
| ▲ | sebmellen 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The most frustrating thing to me is to receive a 5-paragraph-plus email that was clearly written with some AI that filled in the email with vapid and useless talking points, like "Let me know if you need any other blah blah blah; While there is clearly a need for system improvement, we are working hard to address the underlying and fundamental issue; This is a lesson that it's not just a feature, it's a critical path for our users, etc." My theory is that people are fundamentally averse to the thought and effort it takes to write a good quality email. Then there’s probably some underlying belief that more volume shows more effort, which people will perceive positively. And finally, there's the worry that if you write the email yourself, you might make some embarrassing wording, grammar, or spelling mistake. |
| |
| ▲ | munk-a 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Specifically, lets imagine LLMs as compilers - you're passing your prompt through to get some pretty language at the end. Don't send me your compiled code, send me your prompt. Let it be rude, if the wording is awkward I guarantee I can understand it just as well as an LLM, ignore the fact that my daughter just graduated and offering hallucinated platitudes. Send me the actual question, don't make me try and decompile a big blob of empty text to the ten word prompt that contains all the actual meaning. AI is a useful tool for a variety of purposes, what it is not useful for is expanding a short statement to an essay and reducing an essay to a short statement. Either the communication deserves to be an essay or ten words will get it done. | | |
| ▲ | keithnz 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | if you are prompting such that the LLM isn't pulling context that the recipient doesn't have access to, then your email is likely marginal. ie the prompt "Send 'bob' an email with a description of why the VPN bridge isn't working so they can debug their side" is a mostly useless as a prompt for anyone, it's only useful when the LLM has all the context of some analysis of the particular issue and what is going on and then injects it into the email. | | |
| ▲ | munk-a 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Does the recipient already have that context? If you want to share some internal context (say you're a front-end specialist and the recipient is quite unfamiliar with the limitations of your framework) then maybe that'd be helpful? If it's just regurgitating already communicated information then either 1. You are restating the information because you don't believe the recipient understood it the first time and thus you should be very precise in your expression to make sure it isn't too arcane for them
2. The recipient appears to understand the information already in which case why restate it? |
| |
| ▲ | saltcured 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Tangentially, yes, let's imagine LLMs as compilers. How insane is it to advocate the usage of these non-deterministic compilers, where each time you compile may produce different semantics? And then people resort to saving and hand-editing the compiled output. But when they want to change the source, they recompile and have to start over hand-editing the output again. | | |
| ▲ | Krssst an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | More than non deterministic : LLMs don't have a specification to obey to in the first place, while compilers (rather, programming languages) do. | |
| ▲ | munk-a 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Actually, in professional usage in a technical setting this is my prime objection to heavily LLM driven development. Were the tools in usage deterministic then I'd be a lot less objecting to the mandating of their incorporation into workflows. I want to be reading, writing, testing and maintaining the software at the same layer. Right now extreme AI usage leads to reading, testing and maintaining happening in a less expressive language than writing and guess which of those four activities developers enjoy the least and find the hardest - it sure isn't writing. |
| |
| ▲ | bobmarleybiceps 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | yeah this is what drives me crazy about LLM writing. Most of the time the prompt has all the info you need and is like maybe a few sentences. Then the LLM expands it into a few paragraphs... I guess if someone is writing like a big fancy email to send out in bulk, maybe using an LLM to improve would make sense... but just emailing some coworkers it seems super lazy and insulting to send an LLM output :-I | | |
| ▲ | selcuka 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Some people send LLM generated replies in Slack chats! Now there's that. |
| |
| ▲ | ikrenji 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Just because you yourself are OK with being talked to rudely, doesn't mean others are. In fact I'd wager most aren't consciously or unconsciously... | | |
| ▲ | not_kurt_godel 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yeah that attitude will not get you far in life unless you're Steve Jobs, and it'll sink your ship unless you're obnoxiously rich. And even if you're either/both of those things: A. you can and should act better, and B. people will always attach an asshole-asterisk to your name for the rest of your life and probably even a good while after. | | |
| ▲ | ryandrake 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Exactly. In my 25+ year career, I've encountered maybe two dozen or so people whose e-mails and chats were terse, yet admittedly succinct, one-liners and most of them were also raging assholes to work with. The ones who also didn't use capital letters or punctuation in their communications were uniformly assholes. |
| |
| ▲ | selcuka 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm pretty sure "rude" in this context means "brief and to the point", not insulting. Otherwise you can be rude with an LLM as well. Most people I know are happy to receive a focused email rather than an LLM-enhanced, 6 paragraph wall of text. | |
| ▲ | munk-a 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think rude was the wrong word to use. I more meant lacking the pomp and circumstance fluff. I always appreciate considerate and polite speech and think it's requisite to being taken seriously. However, I think directness within the bounds of politeness is optimal. Also, if it's wall-o-text or "staging must be updated before our os version is deprecated sunday" I prefer the latter. | |
| ▲ | bigstrat2003 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | But it's far less rude to just bluntly say something than to send an email generated by an LLM. |
| |
| ▲ | monkpit 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Either rely upon everyone else changing their behavior, or give up and use your LLM to re-compress incoming messages to be informationally dense as you see fit. | | |
| ▲ | edoceo 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's lossy tho. LLMs are crap at picking the "good stuff". Eg: the summary of the email covered the point about the family event but missed that the deal-terms were moving from Wyoming to Delaware. | |
| ▲ | munk-a 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Personally, I'm confident with my level of output so I'll continue to dutifully read all the crap that gets sent to me on company time. I'll just prefer to engage with people who communicate well and encourage that in others. | | |
| |
| ▲ | boredtofears 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I wonder if slight grammar incorrectness (like not capitalizing your sentences or using abbreviations) is going to start becoming a signal of authenticity for people subconsciously. Maybe it already has. |
| |
| ▲ | not_a_bot_4sho 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > receive a 5-paragraph-plus email that was clearly written with some AI Which is promptly and ironically summarized by AI on the receiving side | | |
| ▲ | outofpaper 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's almost as though someone was put in charge of AI growth and all they care about is token burn. | | |
| ▲ | andrekandre 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | thats completely illogical and no business would ever waste their money something like that (eyes-looking emoji) | | |
| |
| ▲ | selcuka 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Sure, but LLMs are inherently lossy. There is no guaranteed way for the second AI to extract the original prompt from the text. |
| |
| ▲ | setopt 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Then there’s probably some underlying belief that more volume shows more effort Hopefully, LLMs will kill that attitude in the long run | | |
| ▲ | SpaceNoodled 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | They're already making it worse ... | |
| ▲ | greenavocado 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | LLM generated texts are an API ideal for interfacing with boomers | | |
| ▲ | _carbyau_ an hour ago | parent [-] | | The boomers I know are grumpy, impatient, can smell bullshit a mile away and are almost insultingly terse. Which is honestly refreshing. So LLMs have no place for me in this regard. |
|
| |
| ▲ | edoceo 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > more volume shows more effort I didn't have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead. - M. Twain | | |
| ▲ | shye 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | It wasn’t Twain who wrote that letter: that quip was posthumously attributed to him, and have been used by multiple others. The earliest source we have for it is a letter by Blaise Pascal, some 250 before Twain ever thought about writing letters, or anything else for that matter. | | |
| |
| ▲ | singleshot_ 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | LLM-written emails are too wordy. But maybe people think that’s what a good email is. (Did an LLM write your post?) |
|
|
| ▲ | mrtksn 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It’s the protocol of the brave new world, you and the recipient need a single sentence to communicate but the culture dictates using certain language and politeness + personal flavor so your AI helps you write culturally appropriate fluff and the person who receives it is using their AI to get rid if the fluff so you are both optimized for productivity through stripping the culture away making your interactions faceless and yourself fungible. You can imagine this spread into dating as well, so you just have sex efficiently to optimize the breeding and hedonism. At some point the protocol of expanding and then compacting with AI will also be removed to optimize the unneeded inference and people will again talk to each other but using the caveman language, stripped away from centuries of culture. |
| |
| ▲ | munk-a 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | My ADHD rejects modernity. I shall type novels when engaged in discussions about feature design decisions and if your question has an easy answer I will give it to you shortly. I absolutely agree with your opinion and I loathe it. | | |
| ▲ | bigiain 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I (mostly) welcome _people_ writing medium to long form emails, slack posts, and pull request comment (and the like). What really grinds my gears is when the clearly desired response is a few words or a single sentence, and what I get is a link to an obviously llm generated 3 page pdf full of em-dashes and emoji bullet pointed lists with very little relevance or context about the question. If I wanted Claude or ChatGPT's response, I would have asked them. If I'm going to bother a cow orker with a question, it's because I want domain specific knowledge or workplace experience that might be important. I'm more and more often internally reacting with "if you didn't bother writing it, I don't need to bother reading it". I would welcome your 30 min or half day turnaround with a well written and thought response, over lazy/disrespectful colleges who are just doing the instant 2026 version of "just fucking google it". | | |
| ▲ | munk-a an hour ago | parent [-] | | Hey, speaking of gear grinding - have you run into LLM generated comments? I have always loathed JavaDoc and friends as I think it encourages vapid space filling comments that are inherently knowable from the code - when it's connected to a renderer (as was the original JavaDoc) so that the comments can be exposed without the code that is fine-ish - it serves a purpose and I can comprehend the rational but in most cases I've seen those comments committed without any intent to ever render them separately. In the modern world we've got comments written by LLMs because "You've got to write a comment, of course, it's required!" but now the actually significant comments (the Why comments - as opposed to the What ones) are lost in a sea of LLM slop so no one will read them. Considering it'd be just as easy for the reader to point a conversational LLM at the codefile if they want the LLM interpretation of what's happening why are we bothering committing it at all? Gosh that really grinds my gears. It's definitely a tangent but that being encouraged is a huge red flag for me. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | hn_throwaway_99 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Ronny Chieng's speech at Harvard's Class Day that went viral put it well, something along the lines of "AI can write emails and summarize threads for you. You know who else can do that? Me." |
|
| ▲ | jrowen 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's insecurity. They worry they might be saying something dumb and the LLM gives them assurance that it sounds "better" and "more professional." |
| |
| ▲ | boelboel 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | And they will just get worse at writing anything by depending on it. Soon enough practically nobody will be able to write. |
|
|
| ▲ | ssl-3 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It is no surprise to me at all that some people reach to bots for help with writing email. I've seen some very incomprehensibly-written communication in my time, including from people who speak English as a first language. The most frustrating group of consistent offenders I've seen was comprised of folks who absolutely should know better: School teachers. |
|
| ▲ | 0x3f 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't use gmail but often get an LLM to write certain emails. The benefit is that it can pull in context and typically one-shot the email without me prompting it at all. For example, a tenant emails me about some issue relating to a specific property. It can go through my leases, find the right one, check other emails to see I ordered a new appliance to that specific address, track shipping/install, all that, then reply appropriately. |
| |
| ▲ | altmanaltman 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think your example is just customer support and not something that requires a personal touch anyway. Like your tenant doesn't care about your tone in that context, just the information. (It does seem like email is the sub optimal channel for this task anyway). But if you're writing to someone with the intention of communicating personally, using AI anyway shows a lack of effort. |
|
|
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | AlienRobot 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Youtube implemented the same sort of thing for channels. If you have a youtube channel and someone comments on one of your videos, there is an AI-generated "reply" that you can click to avoid having to actually think about interacting with commenters on your videos. The weird thing is, if I commented on a channel and they sent me an AI-generated reply, I'd just hate them forever. |
|
| ▲ | mcphage 20 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > It's one thing if you don't speak English well and could use some help making yourself understood If someone reading does this, please, do not. Imperfect English is a lot more pleasant to read than AI slop. It will not sound better, it will sound worse. |
|
| ▲ | anal_reactor 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Normies love this shit because it makes them fit in the crowd effortlessly. Same reason why corporate slop was a thing even before AI. Personally, when I message people I respect I either don't use AI or ask it "please fix typos only", but if it's someone I don't give a fuck about, then AI-generated slop it is, because assuming that the recipient is a random person, AI-generated slop has the highest chance of actually getting shit done. |
|
| ▲ | andrekandre 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [dead] |
|
| ▲ | Almondioco 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| If i write a bad email because i'm frustrated to some company or whatever and want them to change their behavour, i think a llm can write an email, which triggers these people a lot more than my 'polite' way of convincing others. |
| |