31–40 of 51 posts
The English language has no words (yet) to capture that special combination of nausea and embarrassment one feels when they commit in good faith to reading a long piece of prose... only to slowly realize the whole thing is AI generated. But I'm feeling it more and more often these days.
The English language has no words (yet) to capture that special combination of nausea and embarrassment one feels when they commit in good faith to reading a long piece of prose... only to slowly realize the whole thing is AI generated. But I'm feeling it more and more often these days.
[flagged]
There's no objective measurement of “better”, which in itself refutes your argument, but I personally feels AI prose to be very annoying for mostly two reasons:
- it's the same everywhere. People could use AI to write in different styles by prompting and through few-shots learning, but they don't and as a result every AI generated prose looks like something I've already read. Its junk prose the same way way Mac Donalds is junk food.
- if someone doesn't make the effort of writing or even customizing the AI output, then what I'm reading is a low effort post and it's highly unlikely that I'm going to learn anything in the process. As a result as soon as I realize that I'm reading AI slop, I feel the immediate disappointment of having committed some time to reading something that wasn't worth my time.
> Historians will look back at all the silly dead humans in the past that icked and yucked about AI.
Like we look at the silly dead humans in the past who fought back against opium, cigarettes and leaded gasoline?
The English language has no words (yet) to capture that special combination of nausea and embarrassment one feels when they commit in good faith to reading a long piece of prose... only to slowly realize the whole thing is AI generated. But I'm feeling it more and more often these days.
[flagged]
The English language has no words (yet) to capture that special combination of nausea and embarrassment one feels when they commit in good faith to reading a long piece of prose... only to slowly realize the whole thing is AI generated. But I'm feeling it more and more often these days.
I didn't get the same "AI wrote this" that you did, but I get a lot of people saying "AI wrote this" to stuff I definitely wrote by hand, all the way.
The English language has no words (yet) to capture that special combination of nausea and embarrassment one feels when they commit in good faith to reading a long piece of prose... only to slowly realize the whole thing is AI generated. But I'm feeling it more and more often these days.
Does that have something to do with OP's post, though? I mean, it's written like someone who's mostly formally familiar with English. Maybe your infamiliarity with formal English itself is factoring in, because the AIs are ALSO formal in diction? I didn't get the same "AI wrote this" that you did, but I get a lot of people saying "AI wrote this" to stuff I definitely wrote by hand, all the way.
Everything gets labeled AI, flagged, and canned.
I'm getting annoyed at HN now and wish I could join an AI-positive / tech-positive version.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does that have something to do with OP's post, though? I mean, it's written like someone who's mostly formally familiar with English. Maybe your infamiliarity with formal English itself is factoring in, because the AIs are ALSO formal in diction? I didn't get the same "AI wrote this" that you did, but I get a lot of people saying "AI wrote this" to stuff I definitely wrote by hand, all the way.
It's a witch hunt. Everything gets labeled AI, flagged, and canned. I'm getting annoyed at HN now and wish I could join an AI-positive / tech-positive version.
There's a wide spectrum of folks with different opinions on everything here, but I wouldn't say there's some lean towards LLM-hate. I'm not a fan of AI projects, but I can live with the (frankly) very high proportion of AI content co-habitating on this site.
For that reason, I don't think the root post here should be flagged really. That might get reversed, I think there's a flag-count threshold that triggers it automatically. But thinking HN is actively against AI projects stands in preeeetty stark contrast to the front page of HN! It's highly likely that people consider the concept of this metaframework to be bad, and they clicked the flag button instead of not interacting/leaving a curious comment, which is generally the way HN works.
Saying that, you should make one! Hacker mindset and all. It wouldn't be for me, but you might find a less confrontational atmosphere in your own space.
I might be missing something here, but I'm struggling to understand why the concept of mixing up implementation details by request path is desirable. Maybe for colocating a legacy application with a new application that's slowly strangling it [0], but for a new application, this seems antithethical to using a framework in the first place. I can't say for sure why you liked Laravel, but I like Laravel/Rails/et.al. bec…
The rest of the website used to be written in Svelte, but the bundle got unnecessarily big. Because it uses Primate, I could rewrite the frontend part using Marko, shaving off around 30% of the client bundle size. Those are not things you can even try out if you're using one of the lock-in meta-frameworks. So a good framing of the counter question would be, why commit when you don't have to?
However, even if you never end up mixing two or more frontends: you have access to all other features using the frontend of your choice.
The English language has no words (yet) to capture that special combination of nausea and embarrassment one feels when they commit in good faith to reading a long piece of prose... only to slowly realize the whole thing is AI generated. But I'm feeling it more and more often these days.
Persuasive prose, in particular, which is probably the majority of the things that get posted here, is less persuasive to the extent to which it includes obvious "AI tells". Even in the cases where AI is more articulate, (1) the emotional weight of the text feels manipulative when it is clear that the emotions were, at best, "vetted" by a human as opposed to having been produced by one, and (2) I think we have a built-in "bullshit-proximity" sensor, and have recently been trained to expect AI to be more willing to engage in bullshit than humans due to their obsequious disposition. (For the record, I think humans are also full of bullshit, so this one's more of a toss-up.)