Hacker News Reader

Comment by smcleod | Hacker News Reader

"The corpus, and the refresh that changed the answer" ... hello Opus 5.

It wasn’t just the LLM language, the sections “The corpus” and “What the data supports” were disjointed and unconvincing. Likely due to lack of human wrangling. Unfortunately they were the core of the analysis.

I found the article very hard to read. I have never used Opus 5 so not even negatively biased.

My brain at some point refused to read past paragraph 3 and I just felt defeat.

An article talking about astroturfing but so tone deaf as to not even rewrite its ai generated content to be human readable.

It truly feels like the dead internet.

Well done on getting that far. I noped out after the first sentence, and kicked myself for not realising it just based on the title.

EDIT: oh, hang on, I read some other comments, and it turns out there's an AI disclaimer - and, now I check again, it's true! There is! Well, fair enough then, but I think this disclaimer should come literally right at the start

I'm at the stage where I automatically assume everything as AI assisted, but am still willing to engage if there is some effort to humanize.

There is less than zero effort on this one. I don't even think the author read the output himself.

The article does state clearly first that it was first drafted with AI, I appreciate the author's honesty. I wish all AI-assisted articles would do the same.

Even better would be if the draft were written _first_ by a human, then edited in collaboration with AI.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com