You're viewing a single thread.
I guess I don’t have a problem with this.
I struggle to write emails and would potentially use an LLM if that were an option. (Maybe.)The message accepted the request, and was polite, showing concern, even. I assume it was proofread and deemed acceptable to the boss/reflective of their sentiments (although perhaps not copied well).
I guess I don’t see the offense here. Anyone who does see it care to explain why this is a negative?
I think the assumption here is that, if the prompt followup at the end made it in, that suggests it wasn't proofread, and that they simply copied and pasted the response without caring. If that's true, then yeah, that's a little bit offensive. Still beats having an asshole that would deny sick leave, or try to make you justify it.
Yeah. I’ve been trying to ‘pick my battles’ more carefully, as it were.
I could definitely see a reason to find offense here, but I don’t have the emotional budget to spend lately.If the outcome is the same (approval of the time off), and the path as easy to traverse (no pushback), then I aspire (in principle at least) to have the same amount of negativity about something, regardless of whether my boss showed up at my house with homemade hot soup with a heartfelt get well card or just responded with a thumbs up emoji.
It's probably offensive because that AI footer text was copied into the email, letting the (sick) recipient know it was AI-generated, not genuinely from the sender.
Using an LLM is less of an issue than how it was used. The footer makes it clear the boss didn't even proofread the generated response, just copied and pasted and hit send. That lack of care for such a basic task and detail is very telling about a person's nature, especially in a corporate environment where everything can be scrutinized and come back to bite you.
Perhaps my understanding of how these are used is incorrect.
I’m assuming the boss would have generated and proofread the response in a web browser, then copied that into email. Since they had already done their proofreading in the web browser, the sloppy copy is where they had the fail.
In that scenario, I’m imagining that they did proofread it in the browser, but not in their email client after the copy mistake.Hm. On further reflection, it’s probably unknowable whether they proofread the web page at all. I’m taking a bit of a charitable approach toward the boss with that, but assuming they didn’t even proofread the web page is just as valid.
Yeah exactly, I can't say whether they looked over it before or just did a bad job copying, but there was still an opportunity to fix it after that.
From my perspective, regardless of what goes into a work email, I'm giving it one last look over before I actually hit the send button
I am so laconic, sometimes I read my emails back and I am like wow what a robot. So I get humaning it up with a fake human.
Yeah I find that LLMs are good for producing things when I'm unable to properly choose the right words.
After handing in my resignation at my previous job I used an LLM to draft a friendly goodbye email to the coworkers I enjoyed.