Hacker News Reader

Comment by purplekohav | Hacker News Reader

Hi! I work at IEEE Spectrum and there's no way an LLM wrote this. We have a pretty strict Generative AI use policy (bottom of this page https://spectrum.ieee.org/about). I'm guessing this is from writers using actual writing techniques that Gen AI stole from...

View on HN

I took my introductory college writing classes at a college I can’t name-drop without sounding like a jerk, which also did a bunch of LLM research over the years. We used a TON of em dashes in our writing. It’s no mystery, to me, where that stylistically prevalent quirk comes from. I’ve definitely been accused of being an LLM bot.

I just wanted to relate a story.

I was speaking with my 14 year old nephew via messaging last month. It was about a deep topic, synthetic consciousness. He wrote such an intelligent reply that I asked him: hey, was this from an LLM? He was insulted. I did research with his parents and found out that 90% no, he's just a very smart kid.

Is there a name for this this mode of confusion yet?

Strikes me as an opposite of the Uncanny Valley.

Indeed. Along the same lines, the recent "humans parading as agents" on moltbook story made me think... what is the inverse of the goal of captcha? That's impossible practically, right?

The last person who said that to me we John Klinenburg, Cornell.

He was insulted on two counts. Firstly doubting his intelligence. Secondly the insinuation of deception: "You aren't that smart, surely you cheated."

The insulting didn't end there. You asked his parents! Even then you only landed at 90%, yet another insult because why can't he earn 100%? Ethical dilemmas on all sides!

Yes, suspected LLM is mimicry passing under the turning test,encheapened by poor editing, further encheapened by even poorer training. It is going to get both worse,and better at the same time. (I grew up with ELIZA.BAS, and used to easily spot fakes, and it is getting both easier and harder. ) I detest the words of LLM, but not the M. It's a statistical model. It is a very large language statistical model - that is constantly fooling slower hoomins.

That policy doesn't explicitly disallow writers from using LLMs as part of their process, nor does it mention reviewing submissions for content that could be LLM-generated.

I like some of the ideas in the article but there are some very "it wasn't just A, it was B" sentences in there. IEEE has a higher standard.

Schools have a strict Generative AI policy as well, and yet...

Even this commentary looks like it's written by an LLM.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com