Live data from Hacker News

It's insulting to read AI-generated blog posts

blog.pabloecortez.com

311–320 of 565 posts

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

#311
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 just despise the trend of commenting "I asked ChatGPT about this and this is what it said:".

It's like getting an unsolicited text with a "Let Me Google That For You" link. Yes, we can all ask ChatGPT about the thing. We don't need you to do it for us.

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

#312

It's similarly insulting to read your AI-generated pull request. If I see another "dart-on-target" emoji... You're telling me I need to use 100% of my brain, reasoning power, and time to go over your code, but you didn't feel the need to hold yourself to the same standard?

Why have the LLMs „learned“ to write PRs (and other stuff) this way? This style was definitely not mainstream on Github (or Reddit) pre-LLMs, was it?

It’s strange how AI style is so easy to spot. If LLMs just follow the style that they encountered most frequently during training, wouldn’t that mean that their style would be especially hard to spot?

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

#313
I don't know. Content matters more to me. Many of the articles that I read have so little information density that I find it hard to justify spending time on them.I often use AI to summarise text for me and then lookup particular topics in detail if I like.

Skimming was pretty common before AI too. People used to read and share notes instead of entire texts. AI has just made it easier.

Reading long texts is not a problem for me if its engaging. But often I find they just go on and on without getting to the point. Especially news articles.They are the worst.

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

#314
post #161

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?

[deleted]

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

#315
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chatbots are more reliable than 95% of people you can ask, on a wide variety of researched topics.

If I want to know about the law, I'll ask a lawyer (ok, not any lawyer, but it's a useful first pass filter). If I want to know about plumbing I'll ask a plumber. If I want to ask questions or learn about writing I will ask one or more writers. And so on. Experts in the field are way better at their field than 95% of the population, which you can ask but probably shouldn't. There are many 100's of professions, and mo…

In some evaluations, it is already outperforming doctors on text medical questions and lawyers on legal questions. I'd rather trust ChatGPT than a doctor who is barely listening, and the data seems to back this up.

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

#316

It's similarly insulting to read your AI-generated pull request. If I see another "dart-on-target" emoji... You're telling me I need to use 100% of my brain, reasoning power, and time to go over your code, but you didn't feel the need to hold yourself to the same standard?

Why do you need to use 100% of your brain on a pull request?

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

#317

It's similarly insulting to read your AI-generated pull request. If I see another "dart-on-target" emoji... You're telling me I need to use 100% of my brain, reasoning power, and time to go over your code, but you didn't feel the need to hold yourself to the same standard?

You can absolutely ask the LLM to write a concise and professional commit message, without emojis. It will conform to the request. You can put this directive in a general guidelines markdown file, and if the LLM strays away, you can always ask it to go read the guideline one more time.

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

#318

It's similarly insulting to read your AI-generated pull request. If I see another "dart-on-target" emoji... You're telling me I need to use 100% of my brain, reasoning power, and time to go over your code, but you didn't feel the need to hold yourself to the same standard?

Why do you need to use 100% of your brain on a pull request?

Probably to understand what is going on there in the context of the full system instead of just reading letters and making sure there are no grammar mistakes.

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

#319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even letting the LLM “clean it up” puts its voice on your text. In general, you don’t want its voice. The associations are LinkedIn, warnings from HR and affiliate marketing hustles. It’s the modern equivalent of “talking like a used car salesman”. Not everyone will catch it but do think twice.

It's really not hard to say "make it in my voice" especially if it's an LLM with extensive memory of your writing.

No man. This is the whole problem. Don't sell yourself short like that.

What is a writing "voice"? It's more than just patterns and methods of phrasing. ChatGPT would say "rhythm and diction and tone" and word choice. But that's just the paint. A voice is the expression of your conscious experience trying to convey an idea in a way that reflects your experience. If it were just those semi-concrete elements, we would have unlimited Dickens; the concept could translate to music, we could have unlimited Mozart. Instead—and I hope you agree—we have crude approximations of all these things.

Writing, even technical writing, is an art. Art comes from experience. Silicon can not experience. And experiencers (ie, people with consciousness) can detect soullessness. To think otherwise is to be tricked; listen to anything on suno, for example. It's amazing at first, and then you see through the trick. You start to hear it the way most people now perceive generated images as too "shiny". Have you ever generated an image and felt a feeling other than "neat"?

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

#320
If you struggle with communication, using AI is fine. What matters is caring about the result. You cannot just throw it over the fence.

AI content in itself isn't insulting, but as TFA hits upon, pushing sloppy work you didn't bother to read or check at all yourself is incredibly insulting and just communicates to others that you don't think their time is valuable. This holds for non-AI generated work as well, but the bar is higher by default since you at least had to generate that content yourself and thus at least engage with it on a basic level. AI content is also needlessly verbose, employs trite and stupid analogies constantly, and in general has the nauseating, bland, soulless corporate professional communication style that anyone with even a mote of decent literary taste detests.

Post reply on HN