31–40 of 75 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Certainly AI editorialised. I wonder if this is because English isn’t their first language, and they are confidence compensating. I’ve worked with a lot of folks also from Philippines and the Tagalog/English mix leads to some confidence challenges sometimes.
Recommend everyone take this test: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/03/09/business/ai-w... You might be surprised…or you might not. I’ve found it’s a good barometer for whether you actually don’t like AI writing or you just don’t like bad AI writing.
Growing up in a place that's mostly not English speaking, I owe a large part of my English vocabulary to Magic the Gathering. Many of the cards use somewhat obscure words to impart a fantasy theme, and I learned them naturally when playing.
Cool game.
I kind of tried to return to it after like a 2 decade hiatus, but the game these days doesn't feel like the one I played back then.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Certainly AI editorialised. I wonder if this is because English isn’t their first language, and they are confidence compensating. I’ve worked with a lot of folks also from Philippines and the Tagalog/English mix leads to some confidence challenges sometimes.
Recommend everyone take this test: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/03/09/business/ai-w... You might be surprised…or you might not. I’ve found it’s a good barometer for whether you actually don’t like AI writing or you just don’t like bad AI writing.
Question 1 had such different styles. I preferred the style the AI was using, but that was purely a stylistic preference.
Question 3 was a toss-up. They both felt fine, and funny enough they both had a "not just X, it's Y" pattern.
Those were the only two where I clicked the AI version - for the other three, it was obvious which was AI.
Cute premise but reads like a LinkedIn post (or maybe just AI).
I love this new future where every post has comments about whether AI was involved or not!
> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
It "degrades discussion" in exactly the same fashion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I love this new future where every post has comments about whether AI was involved or not!
I really think that the HN guidelines need updating, so that we're directed to consider those comments the same way we do accusations of astroturfing: > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data. It "degrades discussion" in exact…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For sure an AI write up
Certainly AI editorialised. I wonder if this is because English isn’t their first language, and they are confidence compensating. I’ve worked with a lot of folks also from Philippines and the Tagalog/English mix leads to some confidence challenges sometimes.
If you're going off the use of emdashes and endashes, I've been using them for over 25 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really think that the HN guidelines need updating, so that we're directed to consider those comments the same way we do accusations of astroturfing: > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data. It "degrades discussion" in exact…
Except "usually mistaken" doesn't apply here, since it's often true.