21–30 of 30 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can’t believe the abstract has an em dash, a “not X but Y” and a “rule of three” in the first sentence . This is ridiculous.
The reference implementation of slop :) Speaking of which, does anyone know a resource that lists these "tells"? I used to notice them all the time, but now that they've permeated 2/3rds of what I see and hear, I'm starting to go a bit numb.
Slop about slop. Already tired of this new chapter of humanity...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well if you can't judge, doesn't it make your comment completely useless?
No, I don't think OP's comment is useless. It's not just a blanket statement, "Wow, LLM's quick", but also critically reflective, like a brief limitations section. This opens the discussion, by indirectly posing questions like, "Is it really this fast or "cheating"? How could we measure this experimentally? Etc.
The abstract is AI generated and pretty poorly written at that. A paper about grading AI output doesn’t even grade their own abstract.
Can’t believe the abstract has an em dash, a “not X but Y” and a “rule of three” in the first sentence . This is ridiculous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can’t believe the abstract has an em dash, a “not X but Y” and a “rule of three” in the first sentence . This is ridiculous.
Every time I see people complaining about clear writing with signposts, I feel like I'm in Idiocracy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I don't think OP's comment is useless. It's not just a blanket statement, "Wow, LLM's quick", but also critically reflective, like a brief limitations section. This opens the discussion, by indirectly posing questions like, "Is it really this fast or "cheating"? How could we measure this experimentally? Etc.
It's useless because this is not novel at this point, its literally everyone posting on HN - I did a thing with an LLM but idk if its good! That doesn't open up the discussion, it retreads the exact same discussion that both sides are not listening to each other on.