Live data from Hacker News

Flipper One – we need your help

blog.flipper.net

71–80 of 501 posts

Re: Flipper One – we need your help

#71
post #21

Most articles I click on in the HN homepage turn out to be written by AI, judging from the phrasing. I'm weirded out by the fact that people don't seem to find it important to write their own thoughts down. The writing in TFA is clearly supervised by a human, but still, the wording is not human at all.

Tbh, I'm getting more frustrated with the ever-coming flood of "Bah I didn't read because it was obvious AI blah blah" which seemingly every single submission HAS to come with nowadays on HN, god forbid someone is more interested in the content than the flow of the words. If you have specific complaints about the text and content, bring those up instead, and we could discuss those or even correct the linked page itse…

Wow! I hear you and you're absolutely right.

It's not just short-sighted of ; It's self-destructive!

* It's the job of the consumer to correct and edit the content they consume

* Content creators have it hard enough ——— prompt-crafting and imagining transformative and disruptive new horizons in tech

* So what if the prose is 4x longer than it should be? The time value delta between real creatives and the average HN-er can't be compared —— A complete paradigm shift

* If they were real hackers they'd have their AI summarize and distill the info —— I think we can all see who the posers are

I'm excited to read content everyday... 'slop'? That's a coward's word, I see past the prose into the core of the data space, and I'm stronger for it.

Re: Flipper One – we need your help

#73
post #21

Most articles I click on in the HN homepage turn out to be written by AI, judging from the phrasing. I'm weirded out by the fact that people don't seem to find it important to write their own thoughts down. The writing in TFA is clearly supervised by a human, but still, the wording is not human at all.

Tbh, I'm getting more frustrated with the ever-coming flood of "Bah I didn't read because it was obvious AI blah blah" which seemingly every single submission HAS to come with nowadays on HN, god forbid someone is more interested in the content than the flow of the words. If you have specific complaints about the text and content, bring those up instead, and we could discuss those or even correct the linked page itse…

> If you have specific complaints about the text and content, bring those up instead, and we could discuss those or even correct the linked page itself, as it seems to be a wiki. But general complaints that could be copy-pasted for any submission, just so you can feel heard about that you think this was AI written, gets so tiring to read for every submission.

No. And the reason is pretty simple: if you couldn't bother to write it, why should I bother to read it?

And that's the problem with AI: it creates floods of that stuff and makes it hard to differentiate the good-faith use from the bad-faith use. The default can't be "reader, waste your time, even on garbage." A reader-respectful norm needs to be set, and those comments you complain about are part of that. The people making these things need to learn that they've got to put in the work if they want to be read (at least by serious audiences).

Re: Flipper One – we need your help

#74
post #21

Most articles I click on in the HN homepage turn out to be written by AI, judging from the phrasing. I'm weirded out by the fact that people don't seem to find it important to write their own thoughts down. The writing in TFA is clearly supervised by a human, but still, the wording is not human at all.

Tbh, I'm getting more frustrated with the ever-coming flood of "Bah I didn't read because it was obvious AI blah blah" which seemingly every single submission HAS to come with nowadays on HN, god forbid someone is more interested in the content than the flow of the words. If you have specific complaints about the text and content, bring those up instead, and we could discuss those or even correct the linked page itse…

nah it is just super disrespectful to make me read something you were too lazy to read.

Re: Flipper One – we need your help

#75
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can’t be bothered to write it, I can’t be bothered to read it.

But still be bothered to leave a generic complain on HN, which you ideally can copy-paste across all potential LLM-written comments? Something doesn't add up there, don't spend energy writing the comments if you cannot even be bothered to read it because no one was bothered to write it.

> But still be bothered to leave a generic complain on HN, which you ideally can copy-paste across all potential LLM-written comments?

I mean, I personally wouldn't specifically on HN, since it's generally unproductive conversation, but yes? You say this as if there is some gotcha or contradiction there, but there is not. It is far, far, far less work to write a short comment than to read pages and pages of AI slop.

Re: Flipper One – we need your help

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tbh, I'm getting more frustrated with the ever-coming flood of "Bah I didn't read because it was obvious AI blah blah" which seemingly every single submission HAS to come with nowadays on HN, god forbid someone is more interested in the content than the flow of the words. If you have specific complaints about the text and content, bring those up instead, and we could discuss those or even correct the linked page itse…

It is unreasonable to expect “specific complaints” about AI vomit like this, because one of the main issues with AI content is the ability to generate an overwhelming amount of it. It’s simply not feasible to give specific criticisms, because the criticism is with all of it. It’s like submitting a 10 page pull request to someone and then getting mad because the person didn’t give comments on every single snippet of c…

> It is unreasonable to expect “specific complaints” about AI vomit like this, because one of the main issues with AI content is the ability to generate an overwhelming amount of it. It’s simply not feasible to give specific criticisms, because the criticism is with all of it.

But how would that make the "I won't read this because it feels like AI" comments more interesting to read?

No one is forcing you to read this stuff, no one is forcing others to read this stuff as well. When I come across text that isn't great, for whatever reason, then I close the tab and move on with my life. Do I have to make it clear to the world what I think of the text in that specific article? Not really, it'll continue spinning like before, and people who want to read it will read it, others like me will just close it.

It sucks that even if the topic of the submission is interesting, here we are now stuck yet again going back and forth if it's worth saying "I don't think that article was human written" or not in the comments, although I'd hope it'd be considered vastly off-topic.

Re: Flipper One – we need your help

#77
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can’t be bothered to write it, I can’t be bothered to read it.

But still be bothered to leave a generic complain on HN, which you ideally can copy-paste across all potential LLM-written comments? Something doesn't add up there, don't spend energy writing the comments if you cannot even be bothered to read it because no one was bothered to write it.

It reminds me of high school, ages ago, when a friend would go on and on about how Depeche Mode weren’t musicians and how nobody cares about electronic music. I’m a little nostalgic for the hours, cumulatively probably weeks, that I heard about just how much he didn’t care about Depeche Mode.

Re: Flipper One – we need your help

#78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tbh, I'm getting more frustrated with the ever-coming flood of "Bah I didn't read because it was obvious AI blah blah" which seemingly every single submission HAS to come with nowadays on HN, god forbid someone is more interested in the content than the flow of the words. If you have specific complaints about the text and content, bring those up instead, and we could discuss those or even correct the linked page itse…

It is exhausting to always have to read word salads with little content. Every single fucking article with 20 lines of introduction before you get a chance for actual content. LLM slop then dilutes the information, and LLM slop always read the same way. You know, how easy it is to spot LLM generated content, it is actually refreshing when you can tell it's a human.

> It is exhausting to always have to read word salads with little content.

Agreed, but you know how others solve this problem? We close the tab, move on with our lives, without feeling the need to leave the generic "This seems like it was mostly written with LLMs" slopplaint HN comment.

Re: Flipper One – we need your help

#79
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was hesitant to post my comment. It's the first time I've complained about this on HN I think. And it's not only about the flow of the words at all, it's more about reading something that no one wrote. Especially if it's about a project that seems interesting, having AI written text tells me it's maybe not the passion project I otherwise would think it was.

So because this article seems AI written to you, this business and project which is on it's second iteration and been around for years already, maybe isn't a project of passion in your eyes? Seems like a huge logical leap to make, based on things that it seems you cannot even exactly quantify here, as you're still not pointing out what's wrong with the text, just saying that the text is somehow "lacking of soul" or s…

[dead]

Re: Flipper One – we need your help

#80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is unreasonable to expect “specific complaints” about AI vomit like this, because one of the main issues with AI content is the ability to generate an overwhelming amount of it. It’s simply not feasible to give specific criticisms, because the criticism is with all of it. It’s like submitting a 10 page pull request to someone and then getting mad because the person didn’t give comments on every single snippet of c…

> It is unreasonable to expect “specific complaints” about AI vomit like this, because one of the main issues with AI content is the ability to generate an overwhelming amount of it. It’s simply not feasible to give specific criticisms, because the criticism is with all of it. But how would that make the "I won't read this because it feels like AI" comments more interesting to read? No one is forcing you to read this…

> No one is forcing you to read this stuff, no one is forcing others to read this stuff as well

The front page of HN is limited real estate. I visit HN to discover and read interesting and quality content. Whether or not I am “forced” to read it, every piece of AI vomit that’s on the front page is taking a spot away from the real human content that I (and others) really want to see.

> here we are now stuck yet again going back and forth if it's worth saying "I don't think that article was human written"

I genuinely find this discussion in the comments to be of more value than reading the AI content in the article.

People will discuss the content in front of them. If you don’t want that discussion to be about AI content, then the solution is to not submit (or upvote) AI content.

Post reply on HN