Disconcerting to see at the end that the blog post is generated. The genre is decidedly “use-my-thing Readme.md” and all current gen LLMs by default jump to shameless lies when they detect that they are writing such a Readme, although they are perfectly capable of working out the truth in a genre like “essay question on which you will be graded by academic standards.” Are the human “coauthors” lying if I hypothetical…
Why? Firstly, it clearly states it was written collaboratively. The usual division of labour splits the task into ideas and words, human the former, agent the latter. Is this a problem? I was interested in understanding the author’s ideas; consuming the words is an unfortunate chore. Secondly, this was published in three languages. Perhaps you missed the 日本語 and 中文, or dismissed them as agent noise? To reinforce the…
Re: From Julia to Rust: a differentiable tensor stack for scientific computing
#11There's no larger philosophical point here, just an empirical observation that when I trust an AI generated readme I reliably get burned, in a way that I typically don't get burned by e.g. an AI generated svg viewer or batch download script.