Hacker News Reader

Comment by ashishact | Hacker News Reader

I had read 80% of the post and loved it. Then I came to see few comments - Saw yours and now having difficulty reading further. That means:

1. AI has gotten better - or eventually most people would like reading AI generated content 2. Author is just using AI to post-process - content is original

Anyway I did love the content.

View on HN

I feel like the author wrote like the full plan/ substance himself, and gave to an AI the formatting. It's quite fine for me so actually, as long as the substance make sense/is logical.

What about the formatting seems indicative of AI generation? It just looks like normal long-form writing to me.

I can only speak for myself here, but if I feel like I've read a whole paragraph that should have been half a sentence, that's my signal there's possibly AI generated content in there

Have you read any literature ever? Outside of technical and business docs..

The intro section reeks of LLM slop:

> He called the restaurant. He was put on hold for thirty minutes. When someone finally answered, they were apologetic but firm — the restaurant was fully booked. No warmth. No conversation. Just a long wait and a closed door.

If that was written by a human, it's embarrassing.

Some of the headings are very AI-cliche: "Hospitality Is a Dialogue, Service Is a Monologue"; "AI Raises the Floor. Humans Raise the Ceiling"; "Your Employees Are the Moat. The Compounding Is Invisible."

The author didn't use headings like that in their 2024 blog posts.

I'm always curious what types of books people like when they say they liked reading AI, so what were the last few books you've fully read + enjoyed?

I normally have conversation with opus - And I enjoy it. Maybe I am getting fine-tuned.

I have definitely noticed other people using LLM-choice words, myself included, more frequently. It's a strange phenomenon to witness. Obviously the models got them from us first so there must've been some popularity there prior, but the boost is clear. Blast radius, load-bearing, shape, and so on. Or maybe they were always there and my confirmation bias is in high gear.

I do have a sneaking suspicion it's a mix of things, I'm at the point now that I do get a bit of an odd feeling whenever I'm reading AI produced content

I suspect over time it will get good enough that I'll need a larger sample size to identify it, however that won't solve what I think of as the "why does this need to exist" problem, I've noticed that a fair bit of AI content hits that mark, it can be fun, but I've not experienced that feeling of engaging with something that's been well thought out / executed, maybe we'll hit that point[0], but I suspect it will take a while

-[0]: https://xkcd.com/810/

One I've started noticing is the "quotation marks around a phrase awkwardly trying to bundle a concept" thing. Like all LLM cliches it's something that has been used in writing for a long time, but I've seen it so much more recently. I think lots of people have picked this up from seeing LLMs use it. But like you said, who knows.

AI has got better.

It read to me to be entirely generated. The lack of details that people would normally mention tripped my spidey-sense. ( Who wouldn't name-check the restaurant in the opening paragraph? )

A double check, the author appearing to take up blogging in 2023, mostly about data science, with all the tell-tale signs of generated posts.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com