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

Open-source Zig book

zigbook.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 426 posts

Re: Open-source Zig book

#31

Post by the-anarchist »

jasonjmcghee wrote: post #2

So despite this... > The Zigbook intentionally contains no AI-generated content—it is hand-written, carefully curated, and continuously updated to reflect the latest language features and best practices. I just don't buy it. I'm 99% sure this is written by an LLM. Can the author... Convince me otherwise? > This journey begins with simplicity—the kind you encounter on the first day. By the end, you will discover a dif…

Doesn't mean that the author might not use AI to optimise legibility. You can write stuff yourself and use an LLM to enhance the reading flow. Especially for non-native speakers it is immensely helpful to do so. Doesn't mean that the content is "AI-generated". The essence is still written by a human.

Re: Open-source Zig book

#32

Post by maxbond »

Rochus wrote: post #26
maxbond wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using AI to write is one thing, claiming you didn't when you did should be objectionable to everyone.

Who wants to be so petty. I'm sure there are more interesting things to say about this book.

So petty as to lie about using AI or so petty as to call it out? Calling it out doesn't seem petty to me.

I intend to learn Zig when it reaches 1.0 so I was interested in this book. Now that I see it was probably generated by someone who claimed otherwise, I suspect this book would have as much of a chance of hurting my understanding as helping it. So I'll skip it. Does that really sound petty?

Re: Open-source Zig book

#35

Post by gamegoblin »

skor wrote: post #33
gamegoblin wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's a false claim

how do you know this? let us know please, thanks. edit, I see you used this to check: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45948220

pangram.com, the most accurate and lowest false positive AI detector

https://www.pangram.com/blog/third-party-pangram-evals

Re: Open-source Zig book

#36

Post by littlestymaar »

maxbond wrote: post #21
Rochus wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who cares? Still better than just nagging.

Using AI to write is one thing, claiming you didn't when you did should be objectionable to everyone.

This.

I wouldn't mind a technical person transparently using AI for doing the writing which isn't necessary their strength, as long as the content itself comes from the author's expertise and the generated writing is thoroughly vetted to make sure there's no hallucinationated misunderstanding in the final text. At the end of the day this would just increase the amount of high quality technical content available, because the set of people with both a good writing skill and a deep technical expertise is much narrower than just the later.

But claiming you didn't use AI when you did breaks all trust between you a your readership and makes the end result pretty much worthless because why read a book if you don't trust the author not to waste your time?

Re: Open-source Zig book

#37

Post by [deleted] »

maxbond wrote: post #32
Rochus wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who wants to be so petty. I'm sure there are more interesting things to say about this book.

So petty as to lie about using AI or so petty as to call it out? Calling it out doesn't seem petty to me. I intend to learn Zig when it reaches 1.0 so I was interested in this book. Now that I see it was probably generated by someone who claimed otherwise, I suspect this book would have as much of a chance of hurting my understanding as helping it. So I'll skip it. Does that really sound petty?

[deleted]

Re: Open-source Zig book

#38

Post by fuzzy_biscuit »

gamegoblin wrote: post #35
skor wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how do you know this? let us know please, thanks. edit, I see you used this to check: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45948220

pangram.com, the most accurate and lowest false positive AI detector https://www.pangram.com/blog/third-party-pangram-evals

Why does this feel like an ad? I've seen pangram mentioned a few times now, always with that tagline. It feels like a marketing department skulking around comments.

Re: Open-source Zig book

#39

Post by Rochus »

maxbond wrote: post #32
Rochus wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who wants to be so petty. I'm sure there are more interesting things to say about this book.

So petty as to lie about using AI or so petty as to call it out? Calling it out doesn't seem petty to me. I intend to learn Zig when it reaches 1.0 so I was interested in this book. Now that I see it was probably generated by someone who claimed otherwise, I suspect this book would have as much of a chance of hurting my understanding as helping it. So I'll skip it. Does that really sound petty?

[flagged]

Re: Open-source Zig book

#40

Post by shuraman7 »

It's really hard to believe this isn't AI generated, but today I was trying to use the HTTP server from std after the 0.15 changes, couldn't figure out how it's supposed to work until I've searched repos in Github. LLM's couldn't figure it out as well, they were stuck in a loop of changing/breaking things even further until they arrived at the solution of using the deprecated way. so I guess this is actually handwritten which is amazing because it looks like the best resource I've seen up until now for Zig
Post reply on HN