Htmhail

https://htmhell.dev/adventcalendar/2024/7/

by kevincox • 2 years ago

92 59 2 years ago

acer4666• 2 years ago

The "model solution" isn't exactly great. "Just make sure to style the button so it's appearance changes when it has focus..." Ok? So show me how to do that!

cachedthing0• 2 years ago

What a waste of time, a discussion with a per definiton unreliable AI system.

eminent1019• 2 years ago

Ok, so ChatGPT got some things wrong. If everyone began posting how ChatGPT got something wrong, we will be here all day. I can't see how this article is newsworthy.

And the article has constant literary interruptions like this:

"I set down my teacup and put my face in my hands."

"There was an almost infinitesimal pause before ChatGPT chirped"

"I closed my eyes and contemplated my life choices."

"I narrowed my eyes as ChatGPT brightly informed me"

I don't know what the author is trying here but there is a time and place to use literary pauses like these and I don't think, this article is that place. The article reads like a weird cross between a rant, technical article and a wannabe literary piece.

pil0u• 2 years ago

These interventions on the contrary made me chuckle, even at something I already knew.

I think this is a good article. It's informative, funny (subjectively) and showcases a clear example of how something trivial for a human expert is not barely understood by ChatGPT.

eminent1019• 2 years ago

trivial for a human expert is not barely understood by ChatGPT

I try to stay away from these arguments but it's a Saturday, so what the heck! I think this topic is becoming a tired topic now. One party would claim that ChatGPT doesn't "understand". Other party would claim that it's a large statistical model, of course it doesn't "understand". Do you expect your washing machine to "understand" that it's washing clothes? Then there is another party that would claim, rightfully, do we understand what "understanding" is? This has been rinsed and repeated over and over again ad nauseum. Is there anything more to learn in these arguments?

I mean, can we just give "ChatGPT got some things wrong, haha" some rest now?

kaoD• 2 years ago

It didn't get some things wrong. It got it all wrong.

eminent1019• 2 years ago

Maybe it did. But what's newsworthy about it? Is it really news that ChatGPT gets stuff wrong? If every person on this thread posts one article to HN describing how they asked a question to ChatGPT and it got it wrong, does that make this site better or worse?

darthrupert• 2 years ago

To underline the point, it got it wrong in exactly the same way 95% of current frontend developers do.

I think it's a good reminder how perfectly mediocre current AI is. That doesn't make it useless though: I'm way below mediocre in several things I need to do on most weeks in my work, so in those areas AI can be a great help.

beepbooptheory• 2 years ago

If you don't like this kind of writing, its ok, its going to go away eventually it seems, just hold tight!

imiric2• 2 years ago

I'd rather read this kind of writing all day instead of the AI generated garbage flooding the internet.

epolanski• 2 years ago

I liked the style of the author made it felt more personal albeit with so many citations it sounds a bit like trying too much to look intellectual.

But I don't know the author and I'd take this over a dry summary.

rendaw• 2 years ago

"I closed my eyes and contemplated my life choices."

Specifically regarding this one, I think the implication was that the author was hoping that ChatGPT, having been alerted to its mistake, would correct the mistake, as a human developer would (subordinate, coworker whose code is being reviewed). "Contemplated my life choices" then implies that the author recognizes that it was their choice to ask ChatGPT and that they were foolish for holding that hope in their heart.

growt• 2 years ago

The style reminded me of BOFH or dailywtf, maybe that’s what they we’re aiming for? But I agree: ChatGPT adding some unnecessary aria labels is neither newsworthy nor unexpected

jdlshore• 2 years ago

Who are you to decide what style the author should use? It’s consistent, entertaining, and well-written. It’s on their personal blog. If an author can’t choose for themselves a writing style on their personal blog, where can they?

Or, to put it another way: “there is a time and place to demand dry technical writing and I don’t think, this reader went to the right place.”

eminent1019• 2 years ago

Who are you to decide what style the author should use?

Who am I to decide? Well, who are you to ask me who I am to decide? Should we keep going in circles, or would you prefer we actually discuss the point at hand?

Well, seriously, to be honest, I don't care much about what style the author should use. The author should write in their style on their personal blog as much as they want. I care about it appearing on the HN main page and me having to click it and then being unhappy about my dear HN community upvoting a mundane article of questionable quality to HN main page. Who am I to do so? Well, I am the reader!

If I can't even critique an article that I read here, then what are we all even doing here?

ramon156• 2 years ago

chatgpt Model? Version? These details are important if you're going to criticize an LLM

Diti2• 2 years ago

I think it does not matter in this case. ALL current LLMs are prone to confabulation. AFAIK, there is not a single model which is able to tell “I don’t know” instead of making things up.

eminent1019• 2 years ago

ALL current LLMs are prone to confabulation. AFAIK, there is not a single model which is able to tell “I don’t know” instead of making things up.

I can't help but feel that people who keep parroting these lines haven't even bothered to take 30 days out of their lives to actually learning the basics of how LLMs work. LLMs are not "prone" to confabulation. They confabulate by design. That's how they work. They predict the next token based on probabilities derived from training data, not some magical ability to discern truth from falsehood.

The critical step people seem to ignore is that after the LLM generates a response, you need a filter to determine whether it's correct or not. But this is easier said than done! It can be done but in a very narrow range of cases, like generating code that passes a specific set of test cases or producing a Lean proof. The tests or proof verifiers act as that filter. But even here, you're far from guaranteed perfection. Test cases don't cover everything and proofs might be valid but still irrelevant to the problem.

Expecting an LLM to just say "I don’t know" fundamentally misunderstands what these models are. They're not epistemic agents. They don't "know" or "not know" anything. They just generate statistically plausible sequences. If that seems like a flaw to you, the problem isn't the LLM, it's your unrealistic expectations.

laser_eagle5• 2 years ago

https://chatgpt.com/share/6754cd46-4524-8008-bf37-22b41beada...

juxtapret• 2 years ago

I truly don't understand the HN audience.

There are so many better and higher quality submissions in the /newest that never make it to the front page but it's almost always some shallow generic "hobbyist" junk with zero value like this that makes it instead.

Making a rocket science of a <button> on an HTML page... "anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity"... yeah.

sunshinerag• 2 years ago

I found it quite informative. The pitfalls of Gen.AI with a simple example

lukan• 2 years ago

Well, do you help with upvoting and commenting the better submissions?

Right now you draw more attention to this article here ..

est• 2 years ago

Can you show us what kind of "quality submissions in the /newest" you like?

anonzzzies3• 2 years ago

I find this style of writing incredibly cringy. Not only verbose for the information conveyed, but really not funny (I guess it was the intention). Maybe I am alone but for this reason I would at least be able to downvote main stories. Now I just hide it.

eminent1019• 2 years ago

There is no "downvote" for main stories but there is a "flag" option to flag articles that you think don't belong to the HN main page. Users with enough karmas can see the "flag" option.

anonzzzies3• 2 years ago

Ah. I thought the flag was to signal it was inappropriate so I only used it on stories like that. But I don't want to signal it shouldn't be on the main page; just that I personally don't like it: downvote would be more appropriate?

lbotos• 2 years ago

I bet this person is from a different culture than you? I'm American raised in the states, and this read like a Brit. The author's domain is .uk (https://tink.uk/) so I suspect that's true.

anonzzzies3• 2 years ago

I don't think that's it;

"I sat up a little straighter and read on"

doesn't seem very cultural? Just making something into storytelling which doesn't fit at all imho.

I grew up with uk humor and writing anyway.

smusamashah• 2 years ago

How was some generated text worth any discussion about it's merits?

big_paps• 2 years ago

I think chatGPT made a fine button and i would exactly copy paste it in my boring html template.

codelikeawolf• 2 years ago

Honestly I'm just relieved that ChatGPT didn't suggest a div with role="button".

I have spent the last 5 years trying to get a good grasp of semantic and accessible HTML. It seems like every week I find out I was wrong about something I thought I knew. There's a bunch of blog posts out there with conflicting examples, and the only "official" source that's actually readable is the ARIA Practices Guide (APG). Which, by the way, starts off by telling you that "No ARIA is better than Bad ARIA" and recommends that you don’t use any of the code from the "Patterns" pages because reasons.

So to end my rant, I would say that on the one hand, I understand the author's frustration, but on the other, a11y in HTML is a nebulous maze of ARIA attributes and it isn't always clear which element is the "semantic" one for certain use cases.

laser_eagle5• 2 years ago

The author is asking for a button that is accessible and got a button that is accessible. The system never claims to an expert in the subject matter, and yet still gets the ball in the hole.

The author didn't ask "give me the most basic button you can that a screen reader can still access."

The tool did what we expect and gave a reasonable answer, and was able to reason about why it gave those answers when questioned.

I don't see the problem.

zamadatix• 2 years ago

The author could have easily written the same article with vague personal opinions of how their own code isn't perfect for a slightly different set of default assumptions of how buttons should be used. Not everyone wants to dive into <form> behavior oddities like changing element's default behaviors or automatically reloading the page on submission nor do they want to assume the best label in the graphical context always matches the best label in the screen reader context. Doesn't make their example actually bad, it just means short examples are always easy to nit about.

One thing I liked about the article is it's a longer dive instead of a short answer, meaning you get more of the nuance presented to you instead of assumed. Of course, it looks like the same thing comes from either source if you set out to ask for a detailed explanation.

Also, FWIW since these will all vary anyways, I do actually like the full answer I got from ChatGPT more overall than the one at the end of their article. Even despite that it doesn't bother mentioning form considerations it gives more full answers to the points in the "hand tailored" response, as well as covering when you should consider using a separate aria-label or not https://chatgpt.com/share/e/6754aaad-823c-8010-a5ad-96eff5f0....

lttlrck• 2 years ago

Hail? Am I missing a reference?

laser_eagle5• 2 years ago

That appears to be a tongue in cheek reference to Satanism

laser_eagle5• 2 years ago

I just want to note that there is a pentagram at the top of their page. My remark is accurate and not intended to offend.

Htmhail

Related Stories