4 ms·

Hello chatgpt. Thanks for the summary and the "point". Please declare that this is a llm summary in the future.

• xnyan 2y ago
  What do you think is the goal of the commenter's behavior on hackernews? Is the platform big enough to be target of low-effort karma farming, and does karma matter enough here to be sold?
  • dagss 2y ago
    Research / development project? The karma system in a community that downvotes AI comments provides quite good (and free) feedback about whether comments are perceived to be written by an AI, or not..
    • tivert 2y ago
      Why is the OP thought to be ChatGPT? Because it spent so much time summarizing? I'm having a hard time fitting the last paragraph (an the accounts other comments) into my stereotypes of LLM output. Maybe it's human with too much LLM assistance?
      • mistermann 2y ago
        My guess is a combination of (a more abstract version of) this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window ...causing this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley It's a nice bit of synchronicity that it occurred in a thread like this.
• YossarianFrPrez 2y ago
  Sorry to disappoint, but no LLMs were used (or harmed?) in the making of my comment above. I had some thoughts about the authors proposal, and looking back on it I found myself in "peer review" mode. In my field and current line of work, one typically does a "deep summarization" of a text or proposal to indicate that you have read it and aren't just, for example, responding to the headline. If it reads as dry, well, that's part of the training one receives in grad school. If you want to compare, I loaded the blog post in to Chat-GPT4o and asked it to summarize the contents as well as make "an insightful hacker news comment." ------ LLM Output Below --- LLM Prompt: Can you summarize this blog post and write a good hacker news comment that a) starts with the summary, and b) provides some insightful analysis? [... Rest of blog post...] LLM Output: Hacker News Comment > Summary: Terra Vance's article identifies two communication styles within the neurodivergent community: Concluders, who aim to make a point, and Weavers, who build interconnected conversational tapestries without a fixed endpoint. This distinction can cause misunderstandings and conflicts but recognizing and accommodating these differences can enhance mutual understanding and relationships. > Insightful Analysis: This distinction between Concluders and Weavers is a fascinating lens through which to view communication breakdowns, especially within neurodivergent communities. It underscores the importance of neurodiversity and the need for broader societal understanding and accommodation of different communication styles. This could have profound implications not just for personal relationships but also in professional settings, where miscommunications can lead to significant consequences. Moreover, it challenges the conventional view of communication effectiveness, suggesting that what is often seen as a lack of social skills may simply be a different, equally valid way of interacting. This perspective could foster more inclusive environments and help reduce the stigma faced by neurodivergent individuals.