"This is the brute-force fallback when the smart approaches fail, and honestly, it works more often than you’d expect."
Found the LLM generated part.
"This is the brute-force fallback when the smart approaches fail, and honestly, it works more often than you’d expect."
Found the LLM generated part.
Honestly, given how much claude-based prose I was recently reading, I am worried I will soon begin to write in this style naturally.
Ding ding ding!
https://github.com/blader/humanizer/blob/main/SKILL.md#33-co...
ironically that guide is AI-generated
[flagged]
Why is it stupid to flag genuinely LLM-written content? It might've been thought out by a human, but the final version is clearly LLM-written or extremely heavily LLM-edited.
HN guidelines ask you to not do this.
> Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting.
While few read them, it might be helpful if @dang threw in the ", or LLM generated content".
HN guidelines also say that HN is for conversation between humans.
If we are having a conversation with the author through their article, then the prose should be human too. :^)
The 'humans' guidelines are under Comments, not Posts. ;-)
It's mostly boring. About 50% of comments of HN are about this at the moment, drowning out actual discussion.
If someone writes an interesting article using LLM, I don't mind.
Can we stop this stupid trend to generate prose using LLMs?
"... can we stop this stupid trend to flag everything as LLM generated?"
I have trying to fight this war and lose-- this default lazy behaviour "I dont like this post so it must be llm" followed by some idiotic example
Its become a fad here. Half the people dont read any post, just skim it and post "this is llm" and move on