Hacker News Reader

Comment by zerobees | Hacker News Reader

The text is also pretty clearly AI-generated. I guess there's now a market for "I asked an LLM so that you don't have to", but the funny thing is that it's such a wall of text that no one upvoting it will have actually read it. So it's vibe-writing, vibe-coding, and vibe-reading. Full end-to-end synergy.

View on HN

Hi, author here. Sorry, you felt that way. I did put lot of effort in communicating my understanding, and used Claude only for review and visualizations.

I'd suggest splitting the content out into clearly defined sections, lead by the visuals.

Put the visualization and a short explainer, then have additional content show up if the reader drills in.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the content being run through an LLM. Networking is crazy complicated.

Thanks for your feedback. I'll try to do that.

Oh come on. Just seven days before this 60-page essay, you apparently cranked out another 40-page one:

https://fazamhd.com/mental-models/software/

That's 100+ pages of in-depth technical writing in a matter of days. Amazing, really amazing. Also, not something that a human can do.

And FWIW, Pangram classifies vast swathes of "your" article as entirely AI-generated. Yes, I know the tool is not perfect, but between your superhuman productivity, and all the subjective tells, and the output from that tool, it goes onto my mental "AI slop" pile.

What I can't understand is why people can't just own it that they used a chatbot and that it was more than just "for review".

Short publication intervals. That's the heuristic you're going with? I have dozens of such unpublished long form articles on fundamental topics, just waiting for me to carve some time to polish. I expect that on a sabbatical I could finish and post them in quick succession. It's an unreliable indicator to determine AI-writing.

Author here, when I share something on my blog, i take full responsibility on the writing and the concepts being explained. This couldn't have been generated with just LLMs. If it was that easy, i wouldn't have bothered to work on it. I am sorry you felt that this was just slop, but i really thought people would enjoy reading it.

I have my rough drafts ready for all the topics which i want to explain. And I actually spent majority of my week working on the networking article, it's a lot.

Case closed.

How were you able to pick this up? Not challenging your assertion. Just really curious. Can you point to some clues? I read it (with my own eyes). I can't see actual evidence the text itself is artificial or at least, that it is not human-curated.

I wonder whether mathematicians got the same reaction when calculators appeared: "You didn't compute every step by hand, so the result doesn't count."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com