Hacker News Reader

Comment by N7lo4nl34akaoSN | Hacker News Reader

If you've talked to ChatGPT enough this is instantly recognizable as AI writing. It's this kind of romantic hacker poetic ad copy thing. The short little punchy sentences. The sentence fragments. The repetition. This new age Instagram drama: flash talk for goddesses and sunsets.

I guess it works! But it's gross. lol.

View on HN

Immediate tell: Same street. Same place. 2009.

I used AI for only grammar correction since English is not my first language; other than that, my ideas, my thinking, and my way of writing are mine.

You've erased your own voice and evidence of thinking and writing.

I started my blog to document my thoughts over time, and my second reason is to write as much as I can without relying on AI tools. As I said, I didn't use AI for any sentences; all the thinking was mine. I only used it for grammar checks, which helped me avoid mistakes and improve my writing skills. Even if you still think it's bad, at least I'm trying to improve. The article touched a lot of people and made it to the Hacker News front page, so I think the idea itself is fine, and thanks for your feedback.

I've started to really appreciate posts / articles with grammatical errors. I used to dislike those, but now they've become a proof of a human having written it.

Someone asked me on reddit a few days ago for recommendations on places to eat in the town I live in, said they were going to be traveling here soon and wanted some ideas. So I took 30min out of my day to give some good thoughtful suggestions, clicked submit, and _then_ decided to go check out their post/comment history. It was all perfect grammar and oddly short and specific statements.

Now I'm just annoyed and slightly embarrassed

What do you think happened? AI training strategy?

Honestly, the AI tone makes me wonder if there's any truth behind the story or its just a hallucination. You'd probably be better off making grammar errors, or simply asking AI to list your errors and explain to you why they are wrong.

This absoluteness bothered me; the car clearly wasn't in the same exact place, yet it was mentioned at least twice. I think that's what tipped me off to the AI writing.

The car was further in/out of the drive in the two shots, the wheel orientation was different, the window shade was different; all of which made the commentary on it not being abandoned ridiculous; of course someone parks their car back on their own drive, and it'll be in almost the same place, give or take a meter or two.

>If you've talked to ChatGPT enough this is instantly recognizable as AI writing. It's this kind of romantic hacker poetic ad copy thing. The short little punchy sentences. The sentence fragments. The repetition. This new age Instagram drama: flash talk for goddesses and sunsets.

I was going to say it didn't seem like AI to me, but sure enough pangram flagged it as AI. I guess I got used to all the claude-isms that I was only looking for that and not anything else.

Ditto. I fear Opus 5 gave me a false sense of security of how easily I could spot it.

At least the experience he describes seems real

this comment is so meta

Reply on news.ycombinator.com