Comment by Tiberium | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Tiberium | Hacker News Reader

It's kind of funny to be reading this:

> I had Claude Code create mine: I told Claude, more or less: I want to archive, Developer ID-sign, notarize, staple, and install this app to /Applications without ever opening Xcode. Write me a script that does the whole chain and fails loudly if any step breaks.

Even though the text we're reading is Claude talking to us as well :)

Also it was weird to see the mention of "ask your LLM" at almost every stage in the blog post:

> point Claude Code or your LLM coding tool of choice to this blog post, and let it figure it out

> When in doubt, ask your LLM of choice about them and have it help you get set up. It’s the one that’s going to be using Xcode for you anyway.

> The whole point of using the LLM in the first place is to avoid doing things manually that you don’t want to do.

> Again, if in doubt, ask Claude Code or your LLM of choice to create this for you.

> Again, this is why you talk to your LLM, tell it what you want, and have it help build your workflow.

Claude telling us to point Claude to a web site written by Claude so that we can use Claude to create a build environment...

yo dawg

I heard you liked Claude, so I put extra Claude in your Claude so you can do more Claude.

I suppose it's easier to turn everyone into unwitting tokenmaxxers than it is to raise prices again.

Claudius Claudianus (aka Claudian)

… that Claude can use, because Claude can’t use the XCode gui very efficiently.

"Claude was the only LLM to survive the LLM Wars."

I wrote the post myself. But thanks for assuming. :)

Claude didn't write this post. I did.

Like we need another reason not to write and publish!

"This is the part where you think/learn" and "this is the part where you just let the LLM figure it out" is a fine format for advice nowadays I think.

I am getting a little tired of every single HN comment being about how the linked article is written by an LLM.

> Even though the text we're reading is Claude talking to us as well :)

I'm not getting that vibe from this one; I'd bet money on it at least being substantially human edited. What are the tells you're seeing?

The mistakes in the text made me doubt it was AI, but who knows, maybe it's doing that on purpose now

It seems too concise to be AI. My (conscious) heuristic for AI writing is how much context is squeezed into a sentence. LLMs seem to be pretty bad at the kind of elegant compression of meaning humans can do when they have done a lot of writing practice.

If I had to guess, I would say this is the human summarised conversation(s) with a bot.

It wasn't Ai. It was me. I wrote it.

Sorry if my speculation was bad! When I wrote it I meant it as a compliment. Raw LLM output is awful and really needs a human to "translate" the useful content to something worth reading.

1) tell me what they were then, 2) It wasn't AI. It was me

Reply on news.ycombinator.com