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

481–490 of 565 posts

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

#481

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

noir_lord wrote: post #107
cubefox wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's also why in The Matrix (1999) the main character takes the red pill (facing grim reality) rather than the blue pill (forgetting about grim reality and going back to a happy illusion).

Aye I always thought the character of Cypher was tragic as well, his reality sucked so much that he'd consciously go back and live a lie he doesn't remember and then forget he made that choice. The Matrix was and is fantastic on many levels.

It’s a shame they never made any sequels

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

#482

Post by xarope »

ab_io wrote: post #206
jihadjihad wrote: post #23

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?

100%. My team started using graphite.dev, which provides AI generated PR descriptions that are so bloated with useless content that I've learned to just ignore them. The issue is they are doing a kind of reverse inference from the code changes to a human-readable description, which doesn't actually capture the intent behind the changes.

you mean we will get even more of these sort of useless comments?

  // loop over list and act on items
  for each _, item := range items {
    item.act()
  }

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

#483

Post by AppleBananaPie »

buu700 wrote: post #242
chemotaxis wrote: post #79

I don't like binary takes on this. I think the best question to ask is whether you own the output of your editing process. Why does this article exist? Does it represent your unique perspective? Is this you at your best, trying to share your insights with the world? If yes, there's probably value in putting it out. I don't care if you used paper and ink, a text editor, a spell checker, or asked an LLM for help. On th…

Exactly. If it's substantially the writer's own thoughts and/or words, who cares if they collaborated with an LLM, or autocomplete, or a spelling/grammar-checker, or a friend, or a coworker, or someone from Fiverr? This is just looking for arbitrary reasons to be upset. If it's not substantially their own writing or ideas, then sure, they shouldn't pass it off as such and claim individual authorship. That's a differe…

In my experience if the ai voice was immediately noticeable the writing provided nothing new and most of the time is actively wrong or trying to make itself seem important and sell me on something the owner has a stake in.

Not sure if this is true for other people but it's basically always a sign of something I end up wishing I hadn't wasted my time reading.

It isn't inherently bad by any means but it turns out it's a useful quality metric in my personal experience.

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

#484

Post by rphv »

braza wrote: post #155

> No, don't use it to fix your grammar, or for translations, or for whatever else you think you are incapable of doing. Make the mistake. Feel embarrassed. Learn from it. Why? Because that's what makes us human! For essays, honestly, I do not feel so bad, because I can see that other than some spaces like HN the quality of the average online writer has dropped so much that I prefer to have some machine-assisted text…

You don't need to understand code for it to be useful, any more than you need to know assembly to write Python.

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

#485

Post by buu700 »

AppleBananaPie wrote: post #483
buu700 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. If it's substantially the writer's own thoughts and/or words, who cares if they collaborated with an LLM, or autocomplete, or a spelling/grammar-checker, or a friend, or a coworker, or someone from Fiverr? This is just looking for arbitrary reasons to be upset. If it's not substantially their own writing or ideas, then sure, they shouldn't pass it off as such and claim individual authorship. That's a differe…

In my experience if the ai voice was immediately noticeable the writing provided nothing new and most of the time is actively wrong or trying to make itself seem important and sell me on something the owner has a stake in. Not sure if this is true for other people but it's basically always a sign of something I end up wishing I hadn't wasted my time reading. It isn't inherently bad by any means but it turns out it's…

That was essentially my takeaway. The problem isn't when AI was used. It's when readers can accurately deduce that AI was used. When someone uses AI skillfully, you'll never know unless they tell you.

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

#487

Post by akst »

With the exception of using AI to proof read, I agree.

In terms of proof reading, I just mean proof reading, not rewriting anything. especially not using the output verbatim for suggested fixes. And the author should ensure they retain their writing style & be assertive with their discretion on what corrections they should make.

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

#488

Post by akst »

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 would personally find it insulting if i ask someone something and they gave me ChatGPT output, i would rather then say idk and I look for answers else where. If I wanted to ask ChatGPT I would have done so myself.

Generative AI tends to be very sure of itself. It doesn’t say, it doesn’t know when it doesn’t know. Sometimes when it doesn’t it won’t engage in the premise of the question and instead give an answer to an easier question

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

#490

Post by xarope »

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…

so this is the danger. If you are an expert in the content, you'll realize the AI slop.

If you are not an expert, you'll think the AI is amazing, without realizing the slop.

I'll rather do without the AI slop, thanks.

Post reply on HN