[skydhash]

Because any writing needs a core intent they need to convey, which you can summarize down to according to the audience and why it should be important to them. Kinda like the same idea of elevator pitches, “explain like I’m five” and tactical reports when there’s a time constraints.

You got none of that here. It’s just realms of text.

[rfgplk]

Maybe the person writing the report isn't an expert in this domain or doesn't have the time to commit to it? From my point of view as long as the information is accurate and reproducible, it's valuable.

[orphea]

> Maybe the person writing the report isn't an expert in this domain or doesn't have the time to commit to it?

Then maybe that person should not do it? At least until they find the time?

[neerajsi]

The other part is that almost no one would have the energy to spend hours instrumenting and rebuilding musl, reading the kernel mm code, and thinking hard about how they might interact.

Claude is probably not right about the root cause here and is probably bsing, I agree. But it's collected enough raw data to point some expert humans at the right interaction. I'd take this bs bug report and start asking Claude some questions that would guide it to a more plausible actual answer, but that requires a little more experience in kernel development.

[skydhash]

> The other part is that almost no one would have the energy to spend hours instrumenting and rebuilding musl, reading the kernel mm code, and thinking hard about how they might interact.

Maybe because it isn’t needed. That’s the reason we have experts and professionals, because it’s more economical to use them than for everyone to start from scratch. It’s easier to go to a mechanic shops to fix my engine block than to try to do it myself. I’ve heard that a lot of shops charge more if you said an amateur try to fix things first.

It’s a lot of stuff, but that’s not how you experiment for an hypothesis.

[neerajsi]

I've been a systems dev for a long time and have debugged many such tricky issues before. Even on teams of experts, this type of issue would take someone really capable weeks to track down, especially because the repro environment is hard to obtain. And the opportunity cost of doing this type of work for a rare bug is high, since you may never get to an answer and have burned a lot of time. So in practice I solved most of this type of issue early in my career before I had a family and before I had higher level work to do.

The ai doesn't have the same incentives as a human. It can also be applied to the repro where it exists.

Your mechanic analogy is a bit inapt. Sure they're experts and can replace your engine much better than you can. But tracking down a non obvious system level bug like this one is much less repeatable and much harder because the problem has already been filtered through a lot of reviews and testing. As a system becomes mature, the bugs become harder and harder individually to track down.

[skydhash]

> Even on teams of experts, this type of issue would take someone really capable weeks to track down, especially because the repro environment is hard to obtain.

> As a system becomes mature, the bugs become harder and harder individually to track down.

What I'm talking about is that experts knows the system mechanism more than amateurs, so any hypothesis and experimental setup will be more focused and thus more economical than any amateurish one. And there's the matter of knowledge not present in some docs or other forms, such as past experiences.

Even with LLM tooling, we've seen the rises of harnesses and helper tools instead of relying on generation for everything. Who would you trust to build such harness, a domain experts or some random guy off the street?

[applfanboysbgon]

> From my point of view as long as the information is accurate

That's the trillion-dollar catch, isn't it. LLMs love to write 30 paragraphs about some plausibly-correct-sounding explanation that is just as likely to be completely fucking wrong as it is accurate. The bug might be real, but that doesn't mean this analysis is accurate, and trying to figure out where the LLM went off the rails can be a nightmare. If you can actually understand the bug, it doesn't take 30 paragraphs to explain it. I would throw this bug report into my junk bin if I were on the receiving end of it, and I say that as someone who will spend days troubleshooting any issue a user will help me diagnose even if it only happens on their machine.

[mi_lk]

Then where’s the lie in “soulless AI slop”?

[epixu]

I'd rather read walls of AI slop than soulful meatbag bickering. Just because you might have a soul and intent doesn't mean you do anything useful with it. All I see is the intentful invention of more reasons to fight over arbitrary crap.