61–70 of 109 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am curious, what exactly triggers your AI senses in this post?
"This wasn't some dev environment. This wasn't test data." It's not X, it's Y. And repetitions of three.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am curious, what exactly triggers your AI senses in this post?
"This wasn't some dev environment. This wasn't test data." It's not X, it's Y. And repetitions of three.
The Unicode arrows is also something Claude is using really often: “Camera -> RTMP ingest -> MediaKind -> broadcast partners -> your TV.”
And the table at the end is such a Claude thing.
The general style, a series of short sentences that feel like they are building up a punchline is what tells me it’s Claude, but the whole thing does stink of LLM generation
Please stop using AI to write for you, it ruins what is otherwise a fascinating story, and on reflection I struggle to trust it. If you used AI to generate the blog post, did you use AI to generate the screenshots and story?
I'm not against using AI for writing at all but you want to be careful that the output doesn't contain too much of this noise over signal type of wording that repeats and wants to just sell you something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I used Claude as a writing assistant for the initial draft. I'm autistic and long-form writing isn't my strong suit, getting a 4000 word blog post to flow well is genuinely hard for me. But I do edit it pretty heavily after, the voice and the jokes and the structure are mine, the AI just helps me get a baseline down so I'm not staring at a blank page. The research, the screenshots, the disclosure, that's all me.…
My opinion is that this is a great story. But the haters are going to hate. If you had not used AI to fix your post, I bet the top post will be complaining about your grammar. Some people will always find something negative. Simple as that.
It's just that this one in particular lacks one more edit pass removing some of the AI noise on branding-speak and needless repetition (AI tends to list things and beat the point).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"This wasn't some dev environment. This wasn't test data." It's not X, it's Y. And repetitions of three.
Thats a literary style called anaphora. Some people learned this in school, so they can use it to emphasize something. IMHO this is not a strong sign of AI, in fact I think this text has no strong AI indicators.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I used Claude as a writing assistant for the initial draft. I'm autistic and long-form writing isn't my strong suit, getting a 4000 word blog post to flow well is genuinely hard for me. But I do edit it pretty heavily after, the voice and the jokes and the structure are mine, the AI just helps me get a baseline down so I'm not staring at a blank page. The research, the screenshots, the disclosure, that's all me.…
My opinion is that this is a great story. But the haters are going to hate. If you had not used AI to fix your post, I bet the top post will be complaining about your grammar. Some people will always find something negative. Simple as that.
Honestly, no need to write 4000 words if the story can be told in 400. The story is what matters, not word count or "flow".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that people who are bad writers have trouble understanding that AI writes worse than they do
you clearly have never read a 1000 word text written by me (/s, but only partially)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AI is here, not everybody can write well, AI is gonna be used. I don't know about you, but I'd love to read a fascinating story written by a relatively poor writer. But if they can't be bothered to write, I assume the story can't be that good.
But this isn't a story, literature, or a fancy piece of art; it's merely a technical blog post that discloses a security vulnerability. Here, the writing serves only as a vehicle to convey a message. Once you've received it, its purpose has been fulfilled. I would agree with you if the writing were an important part of the message, but here it is not. Not everybody can write well, and this guy clearly had something t…
I disagree wholeheartedly. I'm not a machine. I'm a thinking, feeling, human being.
As a mathematician, I can certainly appreciate precise formulations. They have their place. But this is not that place.
> Not everybody can write well, and this guy clearly had something to tell, and that is what matters.
I'm sadenned that he wouldn't tell it in his way. I'd much rather read his own (poorly written?) words.
I spent over 2 hours and a small (but bigger than 0) amount of my own money to report the issue by emailing and even trying to call them (they didn't have any dedicated responsible disclosure page or contact). After some time, they finally answered my emails, took down the website and "fixed" the issue.
When I finally applied for the role, got ghosted for a week and only after I wrote them again, asking for an update, I got rejected as they allegedly were looking for someone more junior - though the job title was explicitly "Senior XXX Lead".
Some years ago, I went to interview (in person) at a big European financial institution. As I got there around lunchtime, I happened to get to the front door at the same time as some employees were returning from lunch who, very kindly, held the door open for me.
I was in their office around their computers, unsupervised and unaccompanied, for 10-15 minutes, enough time to plant some O.MG USB-C cables.
During the interview, I had a chance to talk to the CTO and told them what happened and how I was allowed access in the office, and immediately saw his face change and quickly change topic, and end the interview.
Unsurprisingly, I didn't get the job - I should have probably kept my mouth shut.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"This wasn't some dev environment. This wasn't test data." It's not X, it's Y. And repetitions of three.
Thats a literary style called anaphora. Some people learned this in school, so they can use it to emphasize something. IMHO this is not a strong sign of AI, in fact I think this text has no strong AI indicators.