I can't tell if this is parody or not. It seems like it's parody.
"Poe's law" strikes again?
The fact that people are taking it seriously is a bit worrying.
Nerd: A language for LLMs, not humans
51–60 of 110 posts
Re: Nerd: A language for LLMs, not humans
#52>NERD is what source code becomes when humans stop pretending they need to write it. It is so annoying to realise mid read that a piece of text was written by an LLM. It’s the same feeling as bothering to answer a call to hear a spam recording.
I don't know how you can be so sure about that sentence being written by LLM. I can imagine it is perfectly possible that a human could've written that. I mean, on some day I might write a sentence just like that. I think HN should really ban complaints about LLM written text. It is annoying at best and a discouraging insinuation at worst. The insinuation is really offensive when the insinuation is false and the auth…
The funny thing is I’ve never seen an author of a post chime in and say “hey! I wrote this entirely myself” on an AI accusation. I either see sheepish admission with a “sorry, I’ll do better next time” or no response at all.
Not saying the commenters never get it wrong, but I’ve seen them get it provably right a bunch of times.
Re: Nerd: A language for LLMs, not humans
#53For the bootstrap c lexer and parser was hand rolling really necessary? Lex and yacc exist for a reason
Re: Nerd: A language for LLMs, not humans
#54>NERD is what source code becomes when humans stop pretending they need to write it. It is so annoying to realise mid read that a piece of text was written by an LLM. It’s the same feeling as bothering to answer a call to hear a spam recording.
I don't know how you can be so sure about that sentence being written by LLM. I can imagine it is perfectly possible that a human could've written that. I mean, on some day I might write a sentence just like that. I think HN should really ban complaints about LLM written text. It is annoying at best and a discouraging insinuation at worst. The insinuation is really offensive when the insinuation is false and the auth…
> I don't know if this sentence was written by LLM or not but people will definitely use LLMs to revise and refine posts. No amount of complaining will stop this. It is the new reality. It's a trend that will only continue to grow.
Using an LLM to generate a post with the implication it is the author's own thoughts is the quintessential definition of intellectual laziness.
One might as well argue that plagiarism is perfectly fine when writing a paper in school.
Re: Nerd: A language for LLMs, not humans
#55[deleted]
Re: Nerd: A language for LLMs, not humans
#56> LLMs tokenize English words efficiently. Symbols like {, }, === fragment into multiple tokens. Words like "plus", "minus", "if" are single tokens.
The insight seems flawed. I think LLMs are just as capable of understanding these symbols as tokens as they are English words. I am not convinced that this is a better idea than writing code with a ton of comments
Re: Nerd: A language for LLMs, not humans
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know how you can be so sure about that sentence being written by LLM. I can imagine it is perfectly possible that a human could've written that. I mean, on some day I might write a sentence just like that. I think HN should really ban complaints about LLM written text. It is annoying at best and a discouraging insinuation at worst. The insinuation is really offensive when the insinuation is false and the auth…
The funny thing is I’ve never seen an author of a post chime in and say “hey! I wrote this entirely myself” on an AI accusation. I either see sheepish admission with a “sorry, I’ll do better next time” or no response at all. Not saying the commenters never get it wrong, but I’ve seen them get it provably right a bunch of times.
> The funny thing is I’ve never seen an author of a post chime in and say “hey! I wrote this entirely myself” on an AI accusation.
I've seen this happen many times here on HN where the one accused comes back and says that they did in fact write it themselves.
Re: Nerd: A language for LLMs, not humans
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know how you can be so sure about that sentence being written by LLM. I can imagine it is perfectly possible that a human could've written that. I mean, on some day I might write a sentence just like that. I think HN should really ban complaints about LLM written text. It is annoying at best and a discouraging insinuation at worst. The insinuation is really offensive when the insinuation is false and the auth…
> I don't know if this sentence was written by LLM or not but people will definitely use LLMs to revise and refine posts. No amount of complaining will stop this. It is the new reality. It's a trend that will only continue to grow. Using an LLM to generate a post with the implication it is the author's own thoughts is the quintessential definition of intellectual laziness. One might as well argue that plagiarism is p…
> Using an LLM to generate a post
You are talking about an entirely different situation that I purposely avoided in my comment.
Re: Nerd: A language for LLMs, not humans
#59Seems the TL;DR is “squished out most of the structural and semantic features of languages to reduce tokens, and trivial computations still work”. Beyond that nothing much to see here.
Re: Nerd: A language for LLMs, not humans
#60>NERD is what source code becomes when humans stop pretending they need to write it. It is so annoying to realise mid read that a piece of text was written by an LLM. It’s the same feeling as bothering to answer a call to hear a spam recording.
I don't know how you can be so sure about that sentence being written by LLM. I can imagine it is perfectly possible that a human could've written that. I mean, on some day I might write a sentence just like that. I think HN should really ban complaints about LLM written text. It is annoying at best and a discouraging insinuation at worst. The insinuation is really offensive when the insinuation is false and the auth…
I agree with you on principle, but agree with the OP in practice. "NERD is what source code becomes when humans stop pretending they need to write it" means nothing. Once I read that I realized there was very little to zero review of the outputs by a human, so it's all potential hyperbole. It flips an internal switch to be more skeptical...for me, at least.
If its output isn't massaged by a team, then I appreciate the callouts until the stack is mature/proven. Doesn't make it better/worse...just a different level of scrutiny.