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

It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

blog.pabloecortez.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 565 posts

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#251

Post by jacquesm »

paulpauper wrote: post #157
alyxya wrote: post #54

I personally don’t think I care if a blog post is AI generated or not. The only thing that matters to me is the content. I use ChatGPT to learn about a variety of different things, so if someone came up with an interesting set of prompts and follow ups and shared a summary of the research ChatGPT did, it could be meaningful content to me. > No, don't use it to fix your grammar, or for translations, or for whatever el…

I have human-written blog posts, and I can rest assured no one reads those either.

I have those too and I don't actually care who reads them. When I write it is mostly to organize my thoughts or to vent my frustration about something. Afterwards I feel better ;)

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#252

Post by zanellato19 »

caconym_ wrote: post #222
alyxya wrote: post #54

I personally don’t think I care if a blog post is AI generated or not. The only thing that matters to me is the content. I use ChatGPT to learn about a variety of different things, so if someone came up with an interesting set of prompts and follow ups and shared a summary of the research ChatGPT did, it could be meaningful content to me. > No, don't use it to fix your grammar, or for translations, or for whatever el…

> It would be more human to handwrite your blog post instead. I don’t see how this is a good argument. The use of tools to help with writing and communication should make it easier to convey your thoughts, and that itself is valuable. Whether I hand write a blog post or type it into a computer, I'm the one producing the string of characters I intend for you to read. If I use AI to write it, I am not. This is a far, f…

The idea that an AI can keep the authors voice just means it is so unoriginal that it doesn't make a difference.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#253

Post by danielbln »

latexr wrote: post #225
px43 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the AI PR were any good, it wouldn’t need review. So, your minimum bar for a useful AI is that it must always be perfect and a far better programmer than any human that has ever lived? Coding agents are basically interns. They make stupid mistakes, but even if they're doing things 95% correctly, then they're still adding a ton of value to the dev process. Human reviewers can use AI tools to quickly sniff out com…

> So, your minimum bar for a useful AI is that it must always be perfect and a far better programmer than any human that has ever lived? You are transparently engaging in bad faith by purposefully straw manning the argument. No one is arguing for “far better programmer than any human that has ever lived”. That is an exaggeration used to force the other person to reframe their argument within its already obvious conte…

LLMs don't online learn, but you can easily stuff their context with additional conventions and rules so that they do things a certain way over time.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#254

Post by unglaublich »

goostavos wrote: post #178
mikepurvis wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would never put up a copilot PR for colleague review without fully reviewing it myself first. But once that’s done, why not?

It destroys the value of code review and wastes the reviewers time. Code review is one of the places where experience is transferred. It is disheartening to leave thoughtful comments and have them met with "I duno. I just had [AI] do it." If all you do is 'review' the output of your prompting before cutting a CR, I'd prefer you just send the prompt.

Maybe we should enforce that users bundle the prompting with their PRs.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#255

Post by yoyohello13 »

noir_lord wrote: post #32
Waterluvian wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah the portcullis to the philosophical topic of, “if you couldn’t tell, does that demonstrate that authenticity doesn’t matter?”

I think it does, We could get a robotic arm to paint in the style of a Dutch master but it'd not be a Dutch master. I'd sooner have a ship painting from the little shop in the village with the little old fella who paints them in the shop than a perfect robotic simulacrum of a Rembrandt. Intention matters but it matters less sometimes but I think it matters. Writing is communication, it's one of the things we as human…

I’ve been learning piano and I’ve noticed a similar thing with music. You can listen to perfect machine generated performances of songs and there is just something missing. A live performance even of a master pianist will have little ‘mistakes’ or interpretations that make the whole performance so much more enjoyable. Not only that, but just knowing that a person spent months drilling a song adds something.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#256

Post by masly »

In a related problem:

I recently interviewed a person for a role as senior platform architect. The person was already working for a semi reputable company. In the first interview, the conversation was okay but my gut just told me something was strange about this person.

We have the candidate a case to solve with a few diagrams, and to prepare a couple slides to discuss the architecture.

The person came back with 12 diagrams, all AI generated, littered with obvious AI “spelling”/generation mistakes.

And when we questioned the person about why they think we would gain trust and confidence in them with this obvious AI generated content, they became even aggressive.

Needless to say it didn’t end well.

The core problem is really how much time is now being wasted in recruiting with people who “cheat” or outright cheat.

We have had to design questions to counter AI cheating, and strategies to avoid wasting time.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#257

Post by Philpax »

j4yav wrote: post #161
orbital-decay wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No? If you ask it to proofread your stuff, any competent model just fixes your grammar without adding anything on its own. At least that's my experience. Simply don't ask for anything that involves major rewrites, and of course verify the result.

If you can’t communicate effectively in the language how are you evaluating that it doesn’t make you sound like a bot?

Verification is easier than generation, especially for natural language.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#258

Post by [deleted] »

nhod wrote: post #243
luisml77 wrote: post #184

Who cares about your feelings, it's a blog post. If the goal is to get the job done, then use AI. Do you really want to waste precious time for so little return?

"I'm choosing to be 'insulted' by the existence of an arbitrary thing in the universe and then upset by the insult I chose to ascribe to it."

[deleted]

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#259

Post by Waterluvian »

yoyohello13 wrote: post #255
noir_lord wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it does, We could get a robotic arm to paint in the style of a Dutch master but it'd not be a Dutch master. I'd sooner have a ship painting from the little shop in the village with the little old fella who paints them in the shop than a perfect robotic simulacrum of a Rembrandt. Intention matters but it matters less sometimes but I think it matters. Writing is communication, it's one of the things we as human…

I’ve been learning piano and I’ve noticed a similar thing with music. You can listen to perfect machine generated performances of songs and there is just something missing. A live performance even of a master pianist will have little ‘mistakes’ or interpretations that make the whole performance so much more enjoyable. Not only that, but just knowing that a person spent months drilling a song adds something.

Two things this great comment reminds me of:

I've been learning piano too, and I find more joy in performing a piece poorly, than listening to it played competently. My brother asked me why I play if I'm just playing music that's already been performed (a leading question, he's not ignorant). I asked him why he plays hockey if you can watch pros play it far better. It's the journey, not the destination.

I've been (re-)re-re-watching Star Trek TNG and Data touches on this issue numerous times, one of which is specifically about performing violin (but also reciting Shakespeare). And the message is what you're sharing: to recite a piece with perfect technical execution results an in imperfect performance. It's the _human_ aspects that lend a piece deep emotion that other humans connect with, often without being able to concretely describe why. Let us feel your emotions through your work. Everyting written on the page is just the medium for those emotions. Without emotion, your perfectly recited piece is a delivered blank message.

Re: It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

#260

Post by rustystump »

alyxya wrote: post #54

I personally don’t think I care if a blog post is AI generated or not. The only thing that matters to me is the content. I use ChatGPT to learn about a variety of different things, so if someone came up with an interesting set of prompts and follow ups and shared a summary of the research ChatGPT did, it could be meaningful content to me. > No, don't use it to fix your grammar, or for translations, or for whatever el…

I agree with you to a point. Ai will often suggest edits which destroy the authentic voice of a person. If you as a writer do not see these suggestions for what they are, you will take them and destroy the best part of your work.

I write pretty long blog posts that some enjoy and dump them into various llms for review. I am pretty opinionated on taste so I usually only update grammar but it can be dangerous for some.

To be more concrete, often ai tells me to be more “professional” and less “irreverent” which i think is bullshit. The suggestions it gives are pure slop. But if english isnt first language or you dont have confidence, you may just accept the slop.

Post reply on HN