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?

More than non deterministic : LLMs don't have a specification to obey to in the first place, while compilers (rather, programming languages) do.

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.

Some people send LLM generated replies in Slack chats! Now there's that.

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.

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.

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.

But it's far less rude to just bluntly say something than to send an email generated by an LLM.

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.

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.

thats completely illogical and no business would ever waste their money something like that (eyes-looking emoji)

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.

TIL. Thanks