Hacker News Reader

Pretty sure it's edited AI. Honestly for dry stuff like this it's okay, if a bit tiring at the end.

Pangram flags it. It also talks about "quietly" and "the gap". It's AI.

AI is fine in itself. The only question are the numbers correct. I'm not sure how to validate them. The facts count the most important. The second is the article readable without being too wordy or any other such problems.

Problem is, if they didn’t put in the effort to write the article, how can I trust that they put in the effort to verify the facts?

Not to mention that the article is terribly verbose and never gets to its point (by the time I gave up, that is, quite a long way through). Writing is how you organize your thoughts, and it’s not been done here.

It’s not even edited, pangram rates it 100% bot-authored.

Yes, a lot of obvious tells.