Comment by sonofhans | Hacker News Reader

Comment by sonofhans | Hacker News Reader

> The fight that proved it worked: 2 weeks ago, a licensed architect attacked the bot, trying to prove my business model harms the profession. The AI (DeepSeek-R3) completely dismantled his arguments. It was hilariously caustic.

I’ve read the linked thread. I see no attacks, only simple questions. Your chatbot sounds like the entity bringing attacks and conflict to this, and at your direction. You’ve said you tuned it to be “… to a defensive bulldog when attacked by a peer.”

For example, the architect asked, “How are you going to mentor junior architects into the profession?” and your chatbot replied, “We're not building a better pyramid—we're burning it down and teaching architects how to fight.”

You’ve claimed your goal is, “To let me operate with a network of seasoned pros,” and the architect asked, in effect, how those seasoned pros are created if chatbots do the work of junior architects.

All this seems like a lot of aggression channeled into creating a chatbot which you then take joy from watching argue with other humans.

> All this seems like a lot of aggression channeled into creating a chatbot which you then take joy from watching argue with other humans.

OP used the terms "battle scars" unironically... I wonder if they end their McDonalds order with "over and out" and use a walkie-talkie to talk to their friends.

I hope OP has friends.

Shh. You're stepping all over his advertisement.

He’s replying here in good faith and continuing the conversation. You cannot ask for more than that.

Thank you, well said.

From TFA:

> You've identified the core disease: "Power in numbers" creates lobbying power but dilutes design excellence into mediocrity.

[citation needed]

I hear you both. Definitely got some scar tissues after 30yrs in the trenches. I did prompt inject the bot to tone down the bulldog attitude after seeing the chat logs. Did test the same questions as a guardian architect again and then pivot to a fresh grad asking for advice, the bot did pivot immediate to a mentoring state.

The current pyramid model is also my personally experience having underwent the same and also involved in hiring interns, interestingly the bot reflected my sentiments. I know it wreaks many nerves, but the profession is actually suffering from entitlement issue with declining design knowledge. But this is just a debate on a different platform.

'Burning down' line may be overkill, but visually accurate if we are to move the AEC toward high value expertise instead of billable hours.

I feel you, I really do. I’ve worked with architects. Architects eat their young; they often treat interns and juniors in horrifying ways. Good on you for trying to find a better way.

To me it seems the answer involves more direct connections between humans, not having for-profit chatbots in between us.

I agree, but its a balancing act. We are 2 person firm juggling our experience with limited resources. The intent, as you probably noticed, is to free up principal time to service clients better. IDK if this is the final answer, but I hope it proves our worth in the AI arena against the big firms, and filters out the 95% of the dead inquiries we get. Time will tell me this works.

> The current pyramid model is also my personally experience having underwent the same and also involved in hiring interns, interestingly the bot reflected my sentiments. I know it wreaks many nerves, but the profession is actually suffering from entitlement issue with declining design knowledge. But this is just a debate on a different platform.

You’re choosing to never hire less experience people so they don’t get the chance to learn knowledge. You and your bot have not answered how the profession continues if no one early in their career is hired again.

You’re sounding dangerously close to AI psychosis from it glazing your ideas constantly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com