Hacker News Reader

Pangram confirms: https://www.pangram.com/history/9ccdf6ed-5016-4325-b1ac-b3b0...

I find it amusing that even the AI skeptic articles are written with AI these days.

The claims and data are interesting (perhaps overstated in the usual Claude way) but it's about 20x more prose than is actually justified.

> Some other commentators said this was AI slop.

To me it read like a combination of human written and AI slop, as if the author had Claude write it and then rewrote portions of it, or the author wrote an initial version and told Claude to "punch it up, without rewriting the whole thing entirely".

Regardless of who or what actually wrote it the piece was much longer than it needed to be (though I do think it highlights a very real problem).