If you are worried about being rude when dealing with misunderstandings, you waste a lot of time coddling your audience. The author describes their highly emotional inability to effectively communicate with an LLM, I point out the issue is a lack of communications skill, and you call that as rude? How else to describe this issue? Effective communications and using LLMs is the issue.
The piece is not that well written, it has large amounts of assumptions that need to be clarified if that information were to be used within an LLM prompt. Very few people, developers included, appear to understand the concept of LLM context construction and management. It is barely even a topic. I suspect because the software engineering professional, as a whole, are composed largely of weak communicators, and the zietgiest of understanding how to use LLMs is truly and genuinely not there. To grasp LLM usage, it is very much "literature calculus", a term or concept not out yet at all.
A big part of having good communication skills is knowing your audience. HN is a forum for people do discuss stories, not a forum for prompting LLMs. Moreover that discussion is supposed to be civil. You might see that civility as a waste of time but, if you do, you're likely to lose your audience, and that is a failure of communication.
Similarly, the intended audience for the author's post is people, not LLMs. So it doesn't really matter whether an LLM would struggle to properly understand and provide a useful response to it because I, as a human being, did understand the perspective, and found it both interesting and thought provoking.
You don't know anything at all about how the author uses an LLM, and nor do I. So when you draw a direct line between software engineers in general being "weak communicators" and the post author being a weak communicator, specifically with LLMs, you are jumping to a conclusion that is not supported by the evidence we can actually see.
You seem to be defending the blog author. The author themselves describes their experience as:
But now, when my brain spontaneously forms a tiny sliver of a potentially interesting concept or idea, I can just shove a few sloppy words into a prompt and almost instantly get a fully reasoned, researched, and completed thought.
This is casual, unmeditated use of an LLM and then allowing an emotional reaction to shut down further investigation. Excuse me for describing the author's own experience and related that back with an interpretation you feel is disrespect. I can dress it with less comprehensible words, disguising the perspective, but it is still a mirror reflection of the blog author's own assessments. He describes being overshadowed and intimidated to paralysis. Is that happening across the board? Are people exposed to LLMs developing inferiority complexes and ambition loss? Can this ideas and issues even be discussed if people are afraid of the topics? Discuss my points, do not say my language is illegal to this community, that is a cop out in an forum that is supposed to be exploring ideas.
The piece is not that well written, it has large amounts of assumptions that need to be clarified if that information were to be used within an LLM prompt. Very few people, developers included, appear to understand the concept of LLM context construction and management. It is barely even a topic. I suspect because the software engineering professional, as a whole, are composed largely of weak communicators, and the zietgiest of understanding how to use LLMs is truly and genuinely not there. To grasp LLM usage, it is very much "literature calculus", a term or concept not out yet at all.