Tried to read through the article, but couldn't finish. I felt this writing heavily alluded to a ChatGPT generated response. Too many punchlines and paragraph breaks.
Tried to read through the article, but couldn't finish. I felt this writing heavily alluded to a ChatGPT generated response. Too many punchlines and paragraph breaks.
Some version of this comment shows up in just about every HN comment thread on a blog post. It must be LLM-generated.
His criticism is valid. Not his fault most blog posts are AI slop these days.
Overzealous pattern matching is not criticism.
Ok, why can I not just read the prompt that went in? Why do I need to read a verbosified version of it? What's the point?
Why must you insist it's LLM-generated based on formatting and feel? What if this is just how the author writes? This is what I mean by overzealous pattern matching.
It does look LLM-assisted, but I'm fairly sure the experiences shared are genuine.
The word genuine is taking on a lot of responsibility in this line of reasoning.
If paragraph breaks are a sign of LLM slop now, then I’m in trouble. The ones in my blog posts are rarely longer than 2 sentences and they are all handcrafted.
I have a hard time staying focused when reading long paragraphs and that includes rereading my own while I write them.
Not that alone. But the way sentences are formed, add it with those frequent pauses, punchlines that are punchy for the sake of it, and that last AI generated image --- all point at an inorganic article. I was just pointing it out, I do not understand the downvotes for it.
Unfortunately you missed the cherry-on-the-top AI generated image of an engineer and her manager mourning the end together.