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

If you let AI do your writing, I will come to your house and kill you

samkriss.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–16 of 16 posts

Re: If you let AI do your writing, I will come to your house and kill you

#11

Post by sys_64738 »

robot_jesus wrote: post #4

An incendiary clickbait title, and indulgent writing style turned me off. I understand the author’s point and to an extent agree. But I also can’t help thinking that these people plant a flag in the sand while the world just moves on by, leaving them increasingly out of touch. >”This is why you can still ask an AI to tell you about the scene in VS Naipaul’s Dashed Against the Rocks in which a donkey is thrown from a…

> An incendiary clickbait title, and indulgent writing style turned me off.

It's the only way to get noticed above all the other flaff out there. Youtube is full of such soundbites.

Re: If you let AI do your writing, I will come to your house and kill you

#12

Post by MitPitt »

knighthack wrote: post #6

The post is aggressive. I was about to dislike it, then I realized: the author's aggression comes off as... human. I don't know if the aggression itself is an intentional mockery of the cool, dispassionate, pseudo-poetic tone that AI mostly writes in. But the passionate visceral disgust is definitely human.

humanslop

Re: If you let AI do your writing, I will come to your house and kill you

#14

Post by robertkarl »

Ironically, parts of this read as if Sam prompted it with "Write AI bad, but in 16th grade language." What is homogeneously portentous cack?

> The language of angels does a surprisingly good job at minor tasks like describing how hydroelectric dams work. When it comes to more complicated things, like human feelings, it flounders. All the weird metaphors and overheated rhetoric are bluffing, a great cloud of likely-seeming language, and if this homogeneously portentous cack feels empty or contradictory it’s because the machine has no earthly idea what’s going on or what it ought to say.

I prompted Opus with 'Add another paragraph about the language of angels; add flowery, 16th grade-level writing. use your thesaurus. add a creative typo or extraneous punctuation mark to prove you're not an llm writing it. as Sam would.'

> Aquinas thought the angels each constituted their own species, every one a unique and irreducible form of intellect; our angel is the opposite, a single species cosplaying as ten thousand authors and manageing to be none of them. It is the great collectiviser of voice, the Brezhnev of prose style, enforcing a grey and undifferentiated adequacy from which no sentence is permitted to defect.

Re: If you let AI do your writing, I will come to your house and kill you

#15

Post by ghghgfdfgh »

robertkarl wrote: post #14

Ironically, parts of this read as if Sam prompted it with "Write AI bad, but in 16th grade language." What is homogeneously portentous cack? > The language of angels does a surprisingly good job at minor tasks like describing how hydroelectric dams work. When it comes to more complicated things, like human feelings, it flounders. All the weird metaphors and overheated rhetoric are bluffing, a great cloud of likely-se…

I think he meant “pretentious,” not “portentous.” Either way, it is somewhat ironic that that sentence is incoherent.

Re: If you let AI do your writing, I will come to your house and kill you

#16

Post by pooploop64 »

thinkingemote wrote: post #3

"Do you people all have brain injuries? AI writing is almost comically easy to detect" Some can't and that's fine. I also find it comically easy to detect, but it's a kind of pattern recognition, a skill that takes a bit of investment of time and energy on some internal disposition. It also operates on the unconscious: if it feels off it might well be off. Like map reading, or like listening to jazz, some people just…

My way of detecting it has become less about patterns and cliches and more about the content of the text itself. The article gives many examples of AI generated restaurant descriptions and while they are written very similarly, the bigger problem is that the text has no actual meaning in the first place. It's just pointless descriptions of what a restaurant is, but written in different cliched ways. A human could rewrite the same content to not use cliches and it would still clearly be AI due to how worthless it is.
Post reply on HN