Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Cut the crap – remove AI bullshit from websites

cut-the-crab.streamlit.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 207 posts

Re: Show HN: Cut the crap – remove AI bullshit from websites

#181

Post by xnorswap »

efitz wrote: post #169
beezlebroxxxxxx wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In effect, we pay lawyers to be ridiculously pedantic for us where pedanticism is required or desired. That level of pedanticism elsewhere, though, is incredibly annoying or precisely what is not desired.

I’ve wondered from time to time if we could replace some of the wordiness of laws and legal documents with bullet lists. For example, a trial about some interpretation of a word in a law could be contributed back to the law as a bullet point that says, “this also applies if …”.

What you're describing is law, most of it is bullet points, take for example the computer misuse act 1990, section 1:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/section/1

Or if you're more patient, the whole lot:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/crossheading/co...

It's all bullet points.

Re: Show HN: Cut the crap – remove AI bullshit from websites

#182

Post by FredPret »

efitz wrote: post #169
beezlebroxxxxxx wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In effect, we pay lawyers to be ridiculously pedantic for us where pedanticism is required or desired. That level of pedanticism elsewhere, though, is incredibly annoying or precisely what is not desired.

I’ve wondered from time to time if we could replace some of the wordiness of laws and legal documents with bullet lists. For example, a trial about some interpretation of a word in a law could be contributed back to the law as a bullet point that says, “this also applies if …”.

> a trial about some interpretation of a word in a law could be contributed back to the law as a bullet point that says, “this also applies if …”.

Is this not what happens in case law?

Re: Show HN: Cut the crap – remove AI bullshit from websites

#183

Post by [deleted] »

keiferski wrote: post #60

I bookmarked this comment a few months ago because I thought it was hilarious and increasingly accurate: It's approaching a very strange situation where people make overly wordy and bloated AI generated content and other people try to use AI to compress it back into useful pellets vaguely corresponding to the actual prompts used to generate the initial content. Which were the only bits anybody cared about in the firs…

[deleted]

Re: Show HN: Cut the crap – remove AI bullshit from websites

#184

Post by tencentshill »

otterley wrote: post #87
criddell wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking of recipes, I just tried this on a page with a quiche recipe. The original page was pretty much a novella built around a recipe. OPs tool worked perfectly. Nicely done.

Paprika is a fantastic recipe filing app that distills bloated pages into just the facts.

Also Umami - I've had the most success with the widest variety of sites using this extension. Also has an excellent iOS app.

Re: Show HN: Cut the crap – remove AI bullshit from websites

#185

Post by red-iron-pine »

keiferski wrote: post #60

I bookmarked this comment a few months ago because I thought it was hilarious and increasingly accurate: It's approaching a very strange situation where people make overly wordy and bloated AI generated content and other people try to use AI to compress it back into useful pellets vaguely corresponding to the actual prompts used to generate the initial content. Which were the only bits anybody cared about in the firs…

> It's approaching a very strange situation where people make overly wordy and bloated AI generated content and other people try to use AI to compress it back into useful pellets vaguely corresponding to the actual prompts used to generate the initial content. Which were the only bits anybody cared about in the first place. One guy pays the AI to dig a hole, the other guy pays the AI to fill in the hole. Back and forth they go, raising the BNP but otherwise not accomplishing anything.

Dead Internet Theory in a nutshell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Internet_theory#:~:text=T....

Re: Show HN: Cut the crap – remove AI bullshit from websites

#186

Post by red-iron-pine »

DanielHB wrote: post #139
keiferski wrote: post #60

I bookmarked this comment a few months ago because I thought it was hilarious and increasingly accurate: It's approaching a very strange situation where people make overly wordy and bloated AI generated content and other people try to use AI to compress it back into useful pellets vaguely corresponding to the actual prompts used to generate the initial content. Which were the only bits anybody cared about in the firs…

It is really interesting because I have been using LLMs a lot for reading legalese documents. At least in the realm of Legal matters we already have this dynamic of "people make overly wordy and bloated LAWYER generated content and other people try to use LAWYERS to compress it back into useful pellet" So at least for legal documents this LLM craze is a big improvement! It is much harder to out-spend other people on…

its use in the legal realm isn't new, and companies like @LegalDiscovery have been at this for years.

LLMs are more general purpose, and will probably eat/merge with that business.

Re: Show HN: Cut the crap – remove AI bullshit from websites

#187

Post by cmeacham98 »

hertg wrote: post #173

I feel like this title is misleading, all this does is make an HTTP request to the site and let an LLM summarize its content. It does not just "cut the crap", it cuts everything and boils it down to AI slop. Point it towards a high quality scientific article, and you'll see that it doesn't just cut "crap", but any information that might be valuable. I get that this can be useful for some sites, I've used Kagi Summari…

Highly unethical in my opinion to not disclose the tool is summarizing via an LLM. As a matter of fact, in the right circumstances it may not only fail to do what the title says, but do the opposite - add hallucinations or other AI generated garbage!

Re: Show HN: Cut the crap – remove AI bullshit from websites

#188

Post by bloomingkales »

worldsayshi wrote: post #168
lolinder wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you looked into OpenAI's GPT-4o pricing lately? They charge $10 for 1M output tokens, or 500k tokens for the price of a $5/mo VPS. If we assume a generous 2 tokens per word on average (OpenAI suggests it's actually 3 tokens per 4 words), that's still 5 full 50k word novels worth of text every month for the price of a single DigitalOcean droplet.

This pricing cannot be sustainable in the long term right? The LLM companies are currently bleeding money.

It’s not sustainable for anything other than static content generation. Any type of back and forth with LLM is simply too costly.

Re: Show HN: Cut the crap – remove AI bullshit from websites

#189

Post by efitz »

FredPret wrote: post #182
efitz wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve wondered from time to time if we could replace some of the wordiness of laws and legal documents with bullet lists. For example, a trial about some interpretation of a word in a law could be contributed back to the law as a bullet point that says, “this also applies if …”.

> a trial about some interpretation of a word in a law could be contributed back to the law as a bullet point that says, “this also applies if …”. Is this not what happens in case law?

The law doesn’t literally get updated with a bullet point. Subsequently attorneys have to do ever greater searches to analyze all the precedents.
Post reply on HN