Hacker News Reader

Comment by tripdout | Hacker News Reader

LLM-written article.

That was my first thought. Ironic they don't want to read LLM responses in their searches but they expect us to read their LLM article about it.

The LLM-isms are a bit boring, but not necessarily a tell that the article as a whole is worthless. I read the full thing and pretty much agree.

Explain your reasoning beyond "oh they used em dashes"

There's a recognizable style to the overall piece.

The subheadings for example "The summary is not the answer" and "The verification problem is real and it compounds" are typical being punchy but not really making much sense.

Also consider

>This is slower. That's real. It's more work. And it is, in practice, more accurate — because accuracy in information retrieval is a function of reading, not of being read to.

The over punchy - It's this. It's that. It's the other - is typical or LLMs. The accuracy being a function of reading not being read to doesn't really make sense - with both normal results and AI you are reading.

etc.

But is anything you said any more than heuristic?

How did you know?!

What do you believe your comment adds to the discussion about this article?

I'd prefer more proof / context than GP gave, but I personally find it very useful to see people making judgements about AI-assistance of articles. Almost no such articles are worth my time, and the more HN people saying it, the more I know not to click past the HN headline.

Pangram agrees it's 100% LLM written.

But I'm sure you understand that AI-driven "AI detectors" have an error rate of probably 90%, right?

I've heard of people taking old writings from 30 years ago, feeding it to an AI detector, and being told "this is AI"

Pangram seems to be tuned to avoid false positives most of the time.

Same as a NSFW tag. It's not about adding to the discussion; it's a very brief warning to users who don't want to see that kind of content, and its brevity makes it come at almost no cost to users who don't care about SFW/NSFW or AI/OC distinctions.

I agree I run the risk of being wrong and could at least provide some evidence, but I think at the very least it can be one additional piece of information someone could use in their consumption of this content.

If you can't be bothered to write even one specific thing from the article content you object to, then your account might as well be a pre-LLM bot that just posts "first" or "LLM Content" which is somehow even lazier than an LLM blog post.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com