Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    117 points LordAtlas | 21 comments | | HN request time: 0.587s | source | bottom
    1. striking ◴[] No.46184861[source]
    I'm excited for the AI wildfire to come and engulf these AI-written thinkpieces. At this point I'd prefer a set of bullet points over having to sift through more "it's not X (emdash) it's Y" pestilence.
    replies(10): >>46184921 #>>46185095 #>>46185343 #>>46185368 #>>46185457 #>>46185739 #>>46186119 #>>46186162 #>>46186384 #>>46187306 #
    2. jakeydus ◴[] No.46184921[source]
    You forgot the italics on Y
    3. almosthere ◴[] No.46185095[source]
    I just copy-paste an article into chatgpt and tell it to give me 3 bullet points for the article. We should have had this forever.
    4. nick486 ◴[] No.46185343[source]
    > "it's not X (emdash) it's Y" pestilence.

    I wonder for how long this will keep working. Can't be too hard to prompt an AI to avoid "tells" like this one...

    replies(3): >>46185589 #>>46185773 #>>46186120 #
    5. PunchyHamster ◴[] No.46185368[source]
    Even if bubble burst will be massive, the slop factories will not stop with using it, because it's one of the use cases LLMs are just good at
    replies(1): >>46186670 #
    6. clickety_clack ◴[] No.46185457[source]
    I’m just glad everyone stopped posting their perfect prompting strategies.
    7. dist-epoch ◴[] No.46185589[source]
    People are already prompting with "yeah, don't do these things":

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing

    replies(1): >>46186035 #
    8. debo_ ◴[] No.46185739[source]
    It makes me wonder what verbal tics / tells it has in other languages.
    replies(1): >>46186475 #
    9. ben_w ◴[] No.46185773[source]
    Anyone lazy enough to not check the output is also going to be lazy enough to be easy to spot.

    People who put the effort into checking the output aren't necessarily checking more than style, but some of them will, so it will still help.

    replies(1): >>46186092 #
    10. ssl-3 ◴[] No.46186035{3}[source]
    "That's such a great observation that highlights an important social issue — let's delve into it!"

    I've been prompting the bot to avoid its tics for as long as I've been using it for anything; 3 years or so, now, I'd guess.

    It's just a matter of reading and understanding the output, noticing patterns that are repetitious or annoying, and instructing the bot as such: "No. Fucking stop that."

    11. phantasmish ◴[] No.46186092{3}[source]
    The trouble is "AI" is waaaaay less of a boost to productivity if you have to actually check the output closely. My wife does a lot with AI-assisted writing and keeps running into companies that think it's going to let them fire a shitload of writers and have the editors do everything... but editing AI slop is way more work than editing the output of a half-decent human writer, let alone a good one.

    If you're getting a lot of value out of LLM writing right now, your quality was already garbage and you're just using it to increase volume, or you have let your quality crater.

    12. wakawaka28 ◴[] No.46186119[source]
    I think there is a high risk that people will begin writing like AI, or they will stop using effective/engaging styles because AI happens to use those. I don't want to deal with people writing in contrived/awkward/imperfect ways just to appear more human. That is a losing game anyway, because AI will learn to copy everyone.
    13. evanelias ◴[] No.46186120[source]
    Luckily there are plenty of other obvious tells!

    Biggest one in this case, in my opinion: it's an extremely long article with awkward section headers every few paragraphs. I find that any use of "The ___ Problem" or "The ___ Lesson" for a section header is especially glaring. Or more generally, many superfluous section headers of the form "The [oddly-constructed noun phrase]". I mean, googling "The Fire-Retardant Giants" literally only returns this specific article.

    Or another one here: the historic stock price data is slightly wrong. For whatever reason, LLMs seem to make mistakes with that often, perhaps due to operating on downsampled data. The initial red-flag here is the first table claims Apple's split-adjusted peak close in 2000 was exactly $1.00.

    There are plenty of issues with the accuracy of the written content as well, but it's not worth getting into.

    14. spwa4 ◴[] No.46186162[source]
    Of course, that's exactly what won't happen. AI as "better spam" is not going away, it's going to wriggle in everywhere.

    It's more things like AI delivering pizza that's under threat. You know, the actual value.

    15. Bluestrike2 ◴[] No.46186384[source]
    > it's not X (emdash) it's Y

    No, no, no! Stop that! The em dash is an wonderful little punctuation mark that's damned useful when used with purpose. You can't turn it into some scarlet glyph just because normal people finally noticed they exist. LLMs use them because we used them, damn it.

    For god's sake, are we supposed to go back to the dark ages of the double hyphen like typographic barbarians in the hopes that a future update won't ruin that, too? After all the work to get text editors to automatically substitute them in the first place?

    What's funny is that, when people first started noticing that LLMs tended to like the em dash, I'd mentioned to a friend that I hoped—rather naively—it might lead to a resurgence and people would think to themselves "huh, that looks pretty useful." Needless to say, I got that one wrong. Are we really going to sacrifice the poor em dash just because people can't come up with a better signifier for LLM text?

    replies(3): >>46186536 #>>46187236 #>>46187486 #
    16. anthk ◴[] No.46186475[source]
    In Spanish: "En resúmen.." (in conclusion...)
    17. striking ◴[] No.46186536[source]
    Oh, no thanks. The emdash is lazy writing, through and through, for the same reason a parenthetical expressed any other way might be. LLMs overuse them the same way humans do: to pack in context where it doesn't belong. I'd happily lay the emdash and all its terrible cousins upon the sacrificial altar to see a renaissance in editing and proper sentence construction.
    18. jen20 ◴[] No.46186670[source]
    It's not like many of those places weren't produce slop beforehand, either.
    19. tjr ◴[] No.46187236[source]
    I first learned about em dash reading the GNU Texinfo manual in the 1990s. Now I have to wear a red, slightly long horizontal line on my shirt, and passersby shun me.
    20. redrix ◴[] No.46187306[source]
    You’re absolutely right! It’s not just pestilence—It’s the death of the internet as we know it. …I’m sorry, I couldn’t help myself.

    Edit: I forgot HN strips emojis.

    21. ehdjfnrn ◴[] No.46187486[source]
    I’ve never seen an LLM use an em-dash the way a thoughtful human is most likely to use them, in a parentheses-like pair. It’s just too bad there’s way too many idiots who cannot notice such subtleties.
    replies(1): >>46187519 #