Hacker News Reader

Comment by ChrisMarshallNY | Hacker News Reader

> pretty clearly spruced up with AI

Get used to it. I don't think we're far from every bit of prose online, being at least edited, if not authored, by AI.

If people don't want to read AI, then they won't be reading anything but literary classics.

I'm not saying I find the prospect thrilling; just that it's inevitable.

As for the topic, projecting values, and life stories onto people from single data points, is a favorite sport of just about anyone. We often see people on this very forum, praising or attacking others as a person, and assigning motives; based on only a single comment. One habit that I've developed, is if someone posts something either in support or in opposition to one of my posts, I look them up, and try to find out as much as possible about them, before responding. It often fails, because people don't want others to know about them, but I suspect that it succeeds, a lot more than people might think.

View on HN

> I don't think we're far from every bit of prose online, being at least edited, if not authored, by AI.

Zero chance of that happening anytime soon. I'm sure a lot of people have adopted it, and more will follow, but there are still plenty of us who enjoy writing and have no desire to let AI tools take that away from us.

> I'm not saying I find the prospect thrilling; just that it's inevitable.

I see no reason why this should be the case. All you have to do is keep writing and it's suddenly not inevitable.

Ironic, enjoying writing yet not catching that "every bit" does not literally mean every bit but an overwhelming majority instead. That some people like writing does not negate their comment.

Re topic:

I have found that in most cases you can simply ask people about their motives. Most often than not those motives and intentions are very different from your prior.

It’s not easy but developing a habit of "blank slating" is quite useful for inner peace.

I honestly do not understand this at all. I never use AI to edit my writing, nor do I want to. To me that defeats the entire fucking point of writing.

It's like learning to play an instrument, and then using AI to make you sound better. Why bother to learn at all then??

I get I may be very much in the minority here, but I still hate it.

> I may be very much in the minority here

you are not the minority, yours is the prevailing attitude on HN (and also the policy - AI-assisted writing is not welcome here) calling out AI isms and smells while ignoring the substance has become sport and an ugly look (IMO) especially with Pangram and sites like (https://www.salahadawi.com/hacker-news-ai-detector) automatically scanning everything that hits the frontpage (using the older/buggier version of Pangram no less)

> It's like learning to play an instrument, and then using AI to make you sound better. Why bother to learn at all then??

I mean having a producer cut multiple takes or remove errors is not exactly new. And I think it exactly proves why people use AI. They could have spent a lot more time getting a piece to where they want it (and they often know where they want it) but why not get there faster. Intelligence and speed are related.

Perhaps because her goal wasn't to become a better writer, but because she wanted to get her view out there?

Editing is critical. All professional writers get edited, and the quality of the editor can make all the difference. No writer likes being edited, but the editing can be the difference between success or failure.

I don't think that literary editors are doing a particularly good job, these days. That may be because they've all been fired.

LLMs can do a decent job of editing, but it imparts a "sameness" to the writing.

I’d go as far to say that no good writer uses AI for editing. It’s a tool for people that don’t know how to write, don’t know what good looks like, and are not confident enough to choose raw over soulless.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com