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

LLM Writing Tropes.md

tropes.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 211 posts

Re: LLM Writing Tropes.md

#191

Post by cptcobalt »

Planktonne wrote: post #143

I find this repellent; why not, instead of trying to push unwelcome generated prose below the radar, stop trying to waste everyone's time? People don't object to these patterns because they hate lists of three; they object to them in this context because of what they signal about the content. If using AI to write is nothing to be ashamed of, then you shouldn't feel the need to hide it. If it is something to be ashame…

There are two factors I see with this:

I sometimes like having my content editorialized. Some of the LLM writing tropes are ok to me—I'd delete them if I added this prompt to my instructions (but I wouldn't). But my editorial preferences—the sense of voice and tone I want the LLM to make—are rarely these tropes. Instead, I have a positive prompt of the angles I do enjoy.

However, what is cloying about these tropes for many is that they're becoming empty words. Instead of tack-sharp summaries or reductions to simple understanding, the model is spilling extra tokens for minimal value—I don't need to read "it's not X, it's Y" for the n-th time today. I'd really prefer tighter, more succinct reading that actually directly quotes sources (which modern models rarely do to avoid copyright traps).

Re: LLM Writing Tropes.md

#192

Post by RevEng »

runako wrote: post #158

These things are always so misguided, and this was no exception. The only way to have a piece of writing not flagged as AI is to write poorly. Ignore grammar, misspell words, etc. Don't follow basic guidance on composition. Generally write in such a way that you would merit no better than a C on a high school writing task. I'll give some examples. Some will be from this list of "AI writing tropes" and some will be fr…

Exactly this! Many times I read an article that someone says is "obviously AI" and lists several tell tale signs, but these are patterns I also follow in my own writing. I guess that makes me an LLM? These are patterns I was taught for years in school, both in high school and in college level technical writing classes. They may be tropes - or rather patterns - but that's because they were taught en masse to students across North America. Like you said, to really sound like an average person, the answer would be to write in an inconsistent, meandering way full of logical fallacies.

Re: LLM Writing Tropes.md

#193

Post by hananova »

lucumo wrote: post #65
glenstein wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also think you can easily get overzealous with it and diagnose increasingly large percentages of ordinary human language as "tropified" due to being part of recognizable cadences. I think most of the things on the list are legit but I think it starts to get to a gray area where it's borrowing ordinary mannerisms of speech that aren't necessarily egregious.

Yes, and it's a detection loop without feedback. You can never verify that a piece of work in the wild is actually AI. The poster is the only one who really knows, and they'll always say it's not. This is a problem, because you can easily get stuck in a self-reinforcing loop. You feel strengthened in your convictions that you're good at ferreting out LLM-speak because you've found so much of it. And you find so much…

Ever since the sloppification of the internet began, I’ve called out hundreds of LLM slop posts. I’ve gotten about 50 responses back from the author, most of them admitting to LLM usage, with only a single one initially vehemently denying it, but then later admitting it.

I cannot know what this says about my false negative rate, but at the very least I am confident in my false positive rate.

Re: LLM Writing Tropes.md

#194

Post by devonkelley »

BoredomIsFun wrote: post #175
devonkelley wrote: post #163

[dead]

Here what kimi thinks: The post is moralizing theater masquerading as craft wisdom. “Just write it yourself” ignores the actual quality curve. Give a modern LLM a one-paragraph brief, ask for 600 words, then spend three minutes deleting the three most obvious adjectives and one “delve.” The result is already clearer, better structured, and more grammatically airtight than what 80 % of English-literate adults can prod…

[dead]

Re: LLM Writing Tropes.md

#195

Post by hananova »

BoredomIsFun wrote: post #178
andelink wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great example of parent comments point.

No not really. It is an excellent rebuttal. It is funny and witty, compared to the sour GP comment.

It’s not excellent anything, except perhaps excellent LLM slop. Cut it out.

Re: LLM Writing Tropes.md

#196

Post by hananova »

BoredomIsFun wrote: post #175
devonkelley wrote: post #163

[dead]

Here what kimi thinks: The post is moralizing theater masquerading as craft wisdom. “Just write it yourself” ignores the actual quality curve. Give a modern LLM a one-paragraph brief, ask for 600 words, then spend three minutes deleting the three most obvious adjectives and one “delve.” The result is already clearer, better structured, and more grammatically airtight than what 80 % of English-literate adults can prod…

I don’t care what an LLM thinks though. Care to share your own thoughts?

Re: LLM Writing Tropes.md

#197

Post by Wojtkie »

Planktonne wrote: post #143

I find this repellent; why not, instead of trying to push unwelcome generated prose below the radar, stop trying to waste everyone's time? People don't object to these patterns because they hate lists of three; they object to them in this context because of what they signal about the content. If using AI to write is nothing to be ashamed of, then you shouldn't feel the need to hide it. If it is something to be ashame…

I really don't like the patterns listed in the link. I'm going to use this just to get the LLMs to stop sounding so "corporate".

Re: LLM Writing Tropes.md

#198

Post by mvkel »

ptak_dev wrote: post #177
mvkel wrote: post #2

Weirdly, LLMs seem to break with these instructions. They simply ignore them, almost as if the pretraining/RL weights are so heavy, no amount of system prompting can override it

[flagged]

> The model isn't wrong — it's just optimizing for the wrong signal.

sniff sniff I feel like I'm going insane.

Re: LLM Writing Tropes.md

#200

Post by salawat »

mobrienv wrote: post #152
Planktonne wrote: post #143

I find this repellent; why not, instead of trying to push unwelcome generated prose below the radar, stop trying to waste everyone's time? People don't object to these patterns because they hate lists of three; they object to them in this context because of what they signal about the content. If using AI to write is nothing to be ashamed of, then you shouldn't feel the need to hide it. If it is something to be ashame…

Treating the act of refining text as a confession of shame misses the point of how writing works. Whether a draft begins as a model output, a dictation, or a scribbled note, the final responsibility belongs to the person who hits publish. Improving prose to remove predictable patterns is the work of an editor. This process ensures the content is worth reading and respects the audience's time. Comparing a software too…

>Comparing a software tool to "poisoning a well" turns a debate over style into a moral crisis that doesn’t fit the situation. If the information is accurate and the writing is clear, the water in the well is fine, regardless of the pump used to get it there. If the water tastes good, complaining about the plumbing is just a distraction.

Speaking of poisoning wells, have you heard of this thing called Search Engine Optimization? Absolutely ruined the Internet.

Post reply on HN