221–230 of 353 posts
The prose is decent, I like the premise, thought provoking idea.
One issue though: I had to use firefox' reader mode, because the contrast between text and background was terrible.
I really REALLY enjoyed this article and the direction it took me in. I went in with zero preconceptions, just read it straight through, and only after opening the comments did I realize it was largely AI-assisted. Even then, I was very pleasantly surprised. The piece takes you by the hand and leads you through a very deliberate and directed journey. Sure, there are moments where things wobbled a bit like some explan…
I understand why people feel like they need more transparency around these things. Reading for me is intentional, and I feel cheated when I put in the effort to read something for which the author put in little. I would like to think the author put in a lot of effort for this story despite AI assistance, and so it was worth me putting effort in. But whether that's true or not I still felt like I got something out of it (hard not to as a software engineer wondering about their place in the world), and that's something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> preface explaining it was written by an LLM why can't the quality of the works stand on its own? Whether there's LLM generation or not should be irrelevant.
because we typically want to know the writer of a piece. we want to know where to lay credit. every book you buy has an author credited. articles in newspapers and magazines have photographer and author attributions. asking an ai to write you a story does not make you an author. if you ask someone to take a photo for you, you don’t magically get to say “look at this photograph, i’m a photographer.” if you ask someone…
but you dodged the question i asked - why can't a piece stand on the contents, rather than its pedigree?
Would you care if a writer used a pen name? Does that in any way diminish their works? What about the unknown editors that contributed?
I'm trying to sort out my own emotions on this. I did not realize this was AI generated while reading it until I came to the comments here... And I feel genuinely had? Like "oh wow, you got me"... I don't like this feeling. It's certainly the longest thing (I know about) I've taken the time to read that was AI generated. The writing struck me as genuinely good, like something out of The New Yorker. I found the story…
The duality of generated content. It feels great to use. It feels terrible to have it used on you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stories are particularly troubling because we have the concept of "suspending disbelief" and readers tend to take a leap of faith with longwinded narratives because we assume the author is going somewhere with the story and has written purposefully. When AI can write convincingly enough, it is basically a honeypot for human readers. It looks well-written enough. The concept is interesting and we think it is going som…
Right, but in the present case we have exactly what you're describing—a story, almost fully written by AI but with some human cherry-picking in the mix. And readers are finding it a phenomenal story and then wanting to vomit retrospectively in learning about the authorship. It just seems patently obvious to me that this is not where the sentiment is going to stay—it will hit the margin, like the people who decide to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> preface explaining it was written by an LLM why can't the quality of the works stand on its own? Whether there's LLM generation or not should be irrelevant.
because we typically want to know the writer of a piece. we want to know where to lay credit. every book you buy has an author credited. articles in newspapers and magazines have photographer and author attributions. asking an ai to write you a story does not make you an author. if you ask someone to take a photo for you, you don’t magically get to say “look at this photograph, i’m a photographer.” if you ask someone…
AI is just a tool
If you used a fancy auto bake cake machine instead of an oven, you still get to claim that you made the cake.
100 years ago someone would be making the claim that using an oven to make cakes “doesn’t count”
All AI did was raise the bar
It’s quite clear here that the author spent a lot of time on this so he absolutely gets credit as the author
Earlier quoted context omitted.
because we typically want to know the writer of a piece. we want to know where to lay credit. every book you buy has an author credited. articles in newspapers and magazines have photographer and author attributions. asking an ai to write you a story does not make you an author. if you ask someone to take a photo for you, you don’t magically get to say “look at this photograph, i’m a photographer.” if you ask someone…
I’ve said this many times before AI is just a tool If you used a fancy auto bake cake machine instead of an oven, you still get to claim that you made the cake. 100 years ago someone would be making the claim that using an oven to make cakes “doesn’t count” All AI did was raise the bar It’s quite clear here that the author spent a lot of time on this so he absolutely gets credit as the author
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am saying on surface it might seem they should be the staunchest opponents and as I said the culture is "only cassette tape is real otherwise fuck off and die" but simultaneously its also one of the least image/player focused genres in some ways, what is being played is of much higher priority than who in specific is playing it.
Hmm I can think of various examples where the guitarist was changed and people dismiss the new guitarist. Take a look at Megadeth for example - every new solo guitarist gets compared to Marty Friedman even though he hasn't been in the band for 26 years. So a lot of it is player focused. But your point also stands here, every new guitarist must play the solos as close to the original ones as possible, otherwise it's n…
Edit: And a lot of modern black metal for example doesn't even bother with stating who they are. Member lists are pseudonymous or anonymous. I think this "anti god" culture makes metal different from other genres in some ways.
I'm trying to sort out my own emotions on this. I did not realize this was AI generated while reading it until I came to the comments here... And I feel genuinely had? Like "oh wow, you got me"... I don't like this feeling. It's certainly the longest thing (I know about) I've taken the time to read that was AI generated. The writing struck me as genuinely good, like something out of The New Yorker. I found the story…
I also had no idea this was LLM generated. After reading your comment, I had a similar emotional reaction. Thinking deeper, it seems prudent that we tag submissions like this with a prefix. Example: "LLM: ". This would be similar to "Show HN: ". While we cannot control what the original sources choose to disclose, we can fill that gap ourselves. My point: I agree with you: It is misleading that the blog post does not…
next stop will be to ask for some sort of regulation
Earlier quoted context omitted.
because we typically want to know the writer of a piece. we want to know where to lay credit. every book you buy has an author credited. articles in newspapers and magazines have photographer and author attributions. asking an ai to write you a story does not make you an author. if you ask someone to take a photo for you, you don’t magically get to say “look at this photograph, i’m a photographer.” if you ask someone…
> want to know the writer of a piece but you dodged the question i asked - why can't a piece stand on the contents, rather than its pedigree? Would you care if a writer used a pen name? Does that in any way diminish their works? What about the unknown editors that contributed?