Hacker News Reader

The quality of natural language output from today’s LLMs seems no better and often worse than LLMs from 18 months ago, at least in my experience. It’s much harder to build a good RL loop for something subjective like good writing, compared to something with an objective and verifiable right or wrong answer, such as software or mathematics.

View on HN

If you gave me natural language from a 125 IQ human and a 155 IQ human I'm not sure I could judge which human is smarter from the writing quality.

And that's a massive intelligence gap!

It may just be that writing is mostly saturated, and the remaining perceived gap is not quality but some kind of "cultural fit".

IQ is a useless thing, but you can absolutely tell intelligence from writing. You don't need to write like [author of your choice], you need smart ideas and the desire to make them understood.

AI writing sucks because there's no intent or choice behind it. It's human thought, blended by linear algebra into pink slime and extruded into sentences.

> IQ is a useless thing, but you can absolutely tell intelligence from writing.

This is inherently self-contradicting.

It is not, as IQ is not an all encompassing measure of intelligence.

IQ doesn't measure writing _at all_ does it?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com