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

Open-source Zig book

zigbook.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 426 posts

Re: Open-source Zig book

#71

Post by blks »

shuraman7 wrote: post #40

It's really hard to believe this isn't AI generated, but today I was trying to use the HTTP server from std after the 0.15 changes, couldn't figure out how it's supposed to work until I've searched repos in Github. LLM's couldn't figure it out as well, they were stuck in a loop of changing/breaking things even further until they arrived at the solution of using the deprecated way. so I guess this is actually handwrit…

> It's really hard to believe this isn't AI generated

Case of a person who is relying on LLMs so much he cannot imagine doing something big by themselves.

Re: Open-source Zig book

#72

Post by finder83 »

johnfn wrote: post #70
finder83 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time I read things like this, it makes me think that AI was trained off of me. Using semicolons, utilizing classic writing patterns, and common use of compare and contrast are all examples of how they teach to write essays in high school and college. They're also all examples of how I think and have learned to communicate. I'm not sure what to make of that either.

To be explicit, it’s not general hallmarks of good writing. It’s exactly two common constructions: not X but Y, and 3 items in parallel. These two pop up in extreme disproportion to normal “good writing”. Good writers know to save these tricks for when they really want to make a point.

Interesting, I'll have to look for those.

Re: Open-source Zig book

#73

Post by maxbond »

Rochus wrote: post #66
maxbond wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand being okay with a book being generated (some of the text I published in this manual [1] is generated), I can imagine not caring that the author lied about their use of AI, but I really don't understand the suggestion I write a book about a subject I just told you I'm clueless about. I feel like there's some kind of epistemic nihilism here that I can't fathom. Or maybe you meant it as a barb and it's not…

I would rather care whether there is a book at all and whether it is useful. > I write a book about a subject I just told you I'm clueless about Use AI. Even if you use AI, it's still a lot of work. Or write a book about why people shouldn't let AI write their books.

I'm also concerned whether it is useful! That's why I'm not gunnuh read it after receiving a strong contrary indicator (which was less the use of AI than the dishonesty around it). That's also why I try to avoid sounding off on topics I'm not educated in (which is too say, why I'm not writing a book about Zig).

Remember - I am using AI and publishing the results. I just linked you to them!

Re: Open-source Zig book

#74

Post by shuraman7 »

blks wrote: post #71
shuraman7 wrote: post #40

It's really hard to believe this isn't AI generated, but today I was trying to use the HTTP server from std after the 0.15 changes, couldn't figure out how it's supposed to work until I've searched repos in Github. LLM's couldn't figure it out as well, they were stuck in a loop of changing/breaking things even further until they arrived at the solution of using the deprecated way. so I guess this is actually handwrit…

> It's really hard to believe this isn't AI generated Case of a person who is relying on LLMs so much he cannot imagine doing something big by themselves.

it's not only the size - it was pushed all at once, anonymously, using text that highly resembles that of an AI. I still think that some of the text is AI generated. perhaps not the code, but the wording of the text just reeks of AI

Re: Open-source Zig book

#75

Post by maxbond »

geysersam wrote: post #69
maxbond wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can be skeptical of anything but I think it's silly to say that these "Not just A, but B" constructions don't strongly suggest that it's generated text. As to why it matters, doesn't it matter when people lie? Aren't you worried about the veracity of the text if it's not only generated but was presented otherwise? That wouldn't erode your trust that the author reviewed the text and corrected any hallucinations ev…

> but I think it's silly to say that these "Not just A, but B" constructions don't strongly suggest ai generated text Why? Didn't people use such constructions frequently before AI? Some authors probably overused them the same frequency AI does.

I don't think there was very much abuse of "not just A, but B" before ChatGPT. I think that's more of a product of RLHF than the initial training. Very few people wrote with the incredibly overwrought and flowery style of AI, and the English speaking Internet where most of the (English language) training data was sourced from is largely casual, everyday language. I imagine other language communities on the Internet are similar but I wouldn't know.

Don't we all remember 5 years ago? Did you regularly encounter people who write like every followup question was absolutely brilliant and every document was life changing?

I think about why's (poignant) Guide to Ruby [1], a book explicitly about how learning to program is a beautiful experience. And the language is still pedestrian compared to the language in this book. Because most people find writing like that saccharin, and so don't write that way. Even when they're writing poetically.

Regardless, some people born in England can speak French with a French accent. If someone speaks French to you with a French accent, where are you going to guess they were born?

[1] https://poignant.guide/book/chapter-1.html

Re: Open-source Zig book

#77

Post by Rochus »

maxbond wrote: post #73
Rochus wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather care whether there is a book at all and whether it is useful. > I write a book about a subject I just told you I'm clueless about Use AI. Even if you use AI, it's still a lot of work. Or write a book about why people shouldn't let AI write their books.

I'm also concerned whether it is useful! That's why I'm not gunnuh read it after receiving a strong contrary indicator (which was less the use of AI than the dishonesty around it ). That's also why I try to avoid sounding off on topics I'm not educated in (which is too say, why I'm not writing a book about Zig). Remember - I am using AI and publishing the results. I just linked you to them!

> I'm also concerned whether it is useful!

So you could do everyone a favour by giving a sufficiently detailed review, possibly with recommendations to the author how to improve the book. Definitely more useful than speculating about the author's integrity.

Re: Open-source Zig book

#78

Post by maxbond »

Rochus wrote: post #77
maxbond wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also concerned whether it is useful! That's why I'm not gunnuh read it after receiving a strong contrary indicator (which was less the use of AI than the dishonesty around it ). That's also why I try to avoid sounding off on topics I'm not educated in (which is too say, why I'm not writing a book about Zig). Remember - I am using AI and publishing the results. I just linked you to them!

> I'm also concerned whether it is useful! So you could do everyone a favour by giving a sufficiently detailed review, possibly with recommendations to the author how to improve the book. Definitely more useful than speculating about the author's integrity.

I'm satisfied with what's been presented here already, and as someone who doesn't know Zig it would take me several weeks (since I would have to learn it first), so that seems like an unreasonable imposition on my time. But feel free to provide one yourself.

Re: Open-source Zig book

#79

Post by ants_everywhere »

jasonjmcghee wrote: post #2

So despite this... > The Zigbook intentionally contains no AI-generated content—it is hand-written, carefully curated, and continuously updated to reflect the latest language features and best practices. I just don't buy it. I'm 99% sure this is written by an LLM. Can the author... Convince me otherwise? > This journey begins with simplicity—the kind you encounter on the first day. By the end, you will discover a dif…

IMO HN should add a guideline about not insinuating things were written by AI. It degrades the quality of the site similarly to many of the existing rules.

Arguably it would be covered by some of the existing rules, but it's become such a common occurrence that it may need singling out.

Re: Open-source Zig book

#80

Post by Rasthor »

mendelmaleh wrote: post #64

> The Zigbook intentionally contains no AI-generated content—it is hand-written, carefully curated, and continuously updated to reflect the latest language features and best practices. I think it's time to have a badge for non LLM content, and avoid the rest.

There is also Brainmade: https://brainmade.org/
Post reply on HN