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

Open-source Zig book

zigbook.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 426 posts

Re: Open-source Zig book

#131

Post by xeonmc »

BlackjackCF wrote: post #86
shuraman7 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's not only the size - it was pushed all at once, anonymously, using text that highly resembles that of an AI. I still think that some of the text is AI generated. perhaps not the code, but the wording of the text just reeks of AI

Can you provide some examples where the text reeks of AI?

https://www.zigbook.net/chapters/45__text-formatting-and-uni...

The repetitiveness of the shell commands (and using zig build-exe instead of zig run when the samples consist of short snippets), the filler bullet points and section organization that fail to convey any actual conceptual structure. And ultimately throughout the book the general style of thought processes lacks any of the zig community’s cultural anachronisms.

If you take a look at the repository you’ll also notice baffling tech choices not justified by the author that runs counter against the zig ethos.

(Edit: the build system chapter is an even worse offender in meaningless cognitively-cluttering headings and flowcharts, it’s almost certainly entirely hallucinated, there is just an absurd degree of unziglikeness everywhere: https://www.zigbook.net/chapters/26__build-system-advanced-t... -- What’s with the completely irrelevant flowchart of building the zig compliler? What even is the point of module-graph.txt? And icing on the cake in the “Vendoring vs Registry Dependencies” section.)

Re: Open-source Zig book

#133

Post by nmilo »

eibrahim wrote: post #99

So many comments about the AI generation part. Why does it matter? If it’s good and accurate and helpful why do you care? That’s like saying you used a calculator to calculate your equations so I can’t trust you. I am just impressed by the quality and details and approach of it all. Nicely done (PS: I know nothing about systems programming and I have been writing code for 25 years)

Because the first thing you see when you click the link is "Zero AI" pasted under the most obviously AI-generated copy I've ever seen. It's just an insult to our intelligence, obviously we're gonna call OP out on this. Why lie like that?

Re: Open-source Zig book

#134

Post by dcre »

charlie90 wrote: post #128

>Learning Zig is not just about adding a language to your resume. It is about fundamentally changing how you think about software. Zig is just C with a marketing push. Most developers already know C.

I suspect most developers do not know C.

Re: Open-source Zig book

#135

Post by anon7000 »

wild_egg wrote: post #88
BlackjackCF wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide some examples where the text reeks of AI?

Literally the heading as soon as you click the submitted link > Learning Zig is not just about adding a language to your resume. It is about fundamentally changing how you think about software. The "it's not X, it's Y" phrasing screams LLM these days

Plenty of people use “it’s not X, it’s Y”

As someone who uses em-dashes a lot, I’m getting pretty tired of hearing something “screams AI” about extremely simple (and common) human constructs. Yeah, the author does use that convention a number of times. But that makes sense, if that’s a tool in your writing toolbox, you’ll pull it out pretty frequently. It’s not signal by itself, it’s noise. (does that make me an AI!?) We really need to be considering a lot more than that.

Reading through the first article, it appears to be compelling writing and a pretty high quality presentation. That’s all that matters, tbh. People get upset about AI slop because it’s utterly worthless and exceptionally low quality.

Re: Open-source Zig book

#136

Post by anon7000 »

johnfn wrote: post #70
finder83 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time I read things like this, it makes me think that AI was trained off of me. Using semicolons, utilizing classic writing patterns, and common use of compare and contrast are all examples of how they teach to write essays in high school and college. They're also all examples of how I think and have learned to communicate. I'm not sure what to make of that either.

To be explicit, it’s not general hallmarks of good writing. It’s exactly two common constructions: not X but Y, and 3 items in parallel. These two pop up in extreme disproportion to normal “good writing”. Good writers know to save these tricks for when they really want to make a point.

Most people aren’t great writers, though (including myself). I’d guess that if people find the “not X but Y” compelling, they’ll overuse it. Overusing some stylistic element is such a normal writing “mistake”. Unless they’re an extremely good writer with lots of tools in their toolbox. But that’s not most people.

Re: Open-source Zig book

#137

Post by [deleted] »

andyferris wrote: post #116
johnfn wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Find me some text from pre-AI that uses so many of these constructions in such close proximity if it’s really so easy - I don’t think you’ll have much luck. Good authors have many tactics in their rhetorical bag of tricks. They don’t just keep using the same one over and over.

The style of marketing material was becoming SO heavily cargo-culted with telltale signs exactly like these in the leadup to LLMs. Humans were learning the same patterns off each other. Such style advice has been floating around on e.g. LinkedIn for a while now. Just a couple years later, humans are (predictably) still doing it, even if the LLMs are now too. We should be giving each other a bit of break. I'd personal…

[deleted]

Re: Open-source Zig book

#138

Post by anon7000 »

johnfn wrote: post #60
geysersam wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly your perception of what is AI generated is wrong. You can't tell something is AI generated only because it uses "not just X - Y" constructions. I mean, the reason AI text often uses it is because it's common in the training material. So of course you're going to see it everywhere.

Find me some text from pre-AI that uses so many of these constructions in such close proximity if it’s really so easy - I don’t think you’ll have much luck. Good authors have many tactics in their rhetorical bag of tricks. They don’t just keep using the same one over and over.

You’re completely right, but blogs on the internet are almost entirely not written by great authors. So that’s of no use when checking if something is AI generated.

Re: Open-source Zig book

#139

Post by ants_everywhere »

James_K wrote: post #109
mef51 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The em dashes?

There's also the classic “it's not just X, it's Y”, adjective overuse, rule of 3, total nonsense (manage memory with surgical precision? what does that mean?), etc. One of these is excusable, but text entirely comprised of AI indicators is either deliberately written to mimic AI style, or the product of AI.

this construction is familiar to anyone who has taken a course on writing post middle or high school.

The formal version is "not only... but also" https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/..., which I personally use regularly but I often write formally even in informal settings.

"not just... but" is just the less formal version.

Google ngrams shows the "not just ... but" construction has a sharp increase starting in 2000. https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=not+just+*+but...

Same with "not only ... but also" https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=not+only+*+but...

Like many scholarly linguistic construction, this is one many of us saw in latin class with non solum ... sed etium or non modo ... sed etium: https://issuu.com/uteplib/docs/latin_grammar/234. I didn't take ancient Greek, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's also a version there.

More info

- https://www.phrasemix.com/phrases/not-just-something-but-som...

- https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/not%20just

- https://www.grammarly.com/blog/writing-techniques/parallelis...

- https://www.crockford.com/style.html

- https://englishan.com/correlative-conjunctions-definition-ru...

Re: Open-source Zig book

#140

Post by trenchpilgrim »

jesseb34r wrote: post #125

This source is really hard to trust. AI or not, the author has done no work to really establish epistemological reliability and transparency. The entire book was published at once with no history, no evidence of the improvement and iteration it takes to create quality work, and no reference as to the creative process or collaborators or anything. And on top of that, the author does not seem to really have any other p…

Do you have any criticism of the content, or just "I don't know the author"?
Post reply on HN