3 ms·

Why is this flagged?

by wakawaka28 11mo ago

nrposner 11mo ago
Presumably because it's LLM-generated, as other comments here are pointing out.
- wakawaka28 11mo ago
  How does anyone know that? Seems like an unfalsifiable accusation you can hurl at anything to dismiss it.
  - nrposner 11mo ago
    If it helps, GPTZero rates the text as 99% AI-generated. In addition, the whole article has a patter that's very typical of LLM-writing, fond of short phrases and reversals. You might also consider that the medium page it's pulled from posts short daily articles on programming, full of surface-level takes on language and technology choice without going into serious technical detail or providing biographical detail about the author, their work, or their projects. Or, most clearly, you might notice that those articles are replete with ASCII flowcharts--something a human writer would almost certainly not bother with in favor of just drawing them, but which is very easy for an LLM to output. All of this points quite clearly to this being LLM-generated. But, as I pointed out in my other comment, as have others above, it's just not well argued. The points are shallow and don't adequately support the claims made. It looks to me very much like someone churning out posts on surface-level topics by prompting an LLM, either not having the expertise to tell the quality of the argument or just not bothering.
akagusu 11mo ago
Because there is a coordinated effort on HN to suppress any dissent view on certain topics. Rust is one of these topics. If you want to be flagged and down voted, just write a critic about Rust. Even tell about this is a motive to be down voted.
- bigyabai 11mo ago
  Your account is like 90% Rust-bashing. Have you considered getting a job?
- aw1621107 11mo ago
  > If you want to be flagged and down voted, just write a critic about Rust. Nonsense. It's not all that hard to find well-received stuff on HN critical of Rust (e.g., from a quick search there's [0, 1, 2] and plenty more, especially around async and/or deps). The key is to write substantive/thoughtful/constructive criticism. In fact, that applies in general - substantive/thoughtful/constructive articles/comments are much more likely to be well-received no matter their topic. This article does touch on some of Rust's weaknesses/pain points, but does an absolutely atrocious job of doing so. Right off the bat you have this: Example comparison (small benchmark): # C++ (g++) $ time g++ main.cpp -o main real 0m0.4s # Rust (cargo build --release) $ time cargo build --release real 0m9.7s Yes, Rust's compile times can be long, but if you wanted to demonstrate that then this is pretty much the worst possible way to do so as not only is it not comparing apples to apples (it's comparing a debug build to a release build) but we don't even know what is being compiled! And it's pretty much downhill from there. Like this: > Suddenly, the compiler starts screaming: error[E0515]: cannot return value referencing local variable Well yes, that's an error. It's also wrong in C++. In fact, C++26 makes (some forms?) a hard error as well, so C++ is moving to match Rust in this respect. The code organization example is yet again not an apples-to-apples comparison. It's also straight up wrong to boot. The migration decision tree is inconsistent as well. If "memory safety is your #1 priority", then C++ with sanitizers is definitely not a viable option. So on and so forth. If you want to write Rust criticism and be received well, this is definitely not the way to do so. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40172033 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40172033 [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36239534 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36239534 [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41791773 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41791773
  - wakawaka28 11mo ago
    Much more superficial stuff flies on this site and even gets hundreds of upvotes. You haven't explained why this is flagged.
timeon 11mo ago
It is just rage-bait without content. Like made-up benchmark without specifying what it was comparing. Showing code that actually works and then providing error message that is not related or caused by that code. Etc.

Why is this flagged?

nrposner 11mo ago

Presumably because it's LLM-generated, as other comments here are pointing out.

wakawaka28 11mo ago
How does anyone know that? Seems like an unfalsifiable accusation you can hurl at anything to dismiss it.
- nrposner 11mo ago
  If it helps, GPTZero rates the text as 99% AI-generated. In addition, the whole article has a patter that's very typical of LLM-writing, fond of short phrases and reversals. You might also consider that the medium page it's pulled from posts short daily articles on programming, full of surface-level takes on language and technology choice without going into serious technical detail or providing biographical detail about the author, their work, or their projects. Or, most clearly, you might notice that those articles are replete with ASCII flowcharts--something a human writer would almost certainly not bother with in favor of just drawing them, but which is very easy for an LLM to output. All of this points quite clearly to this being LLM-generated. But, as I pointed out in my other comment, as have others above, it's just not well argued. The points are shallow and don't adequately support the claims made. It looks to me very much like someone churning out posts on surface-level topics by prompting an LLM, either not having the expertise to tell the quality of the argument or just not bothering.

akagusu 11mo ago

Because there is a coordinated effort on HN to suppress any dissent view on certain topics. Rust is one of these topics. If you want to be flagged and down voted, just write a critic about Rust. Even tell about this is a motive to be down voted.

bigyabai 11mo ago
Your account is like 90% Rust-bashing. Have you considered getting a job?
aw1621107 11mo ago
> If you want to be flagged and down voted, just write a critic about Rust. Nonsense. It's not all that hard to find well-received stuff on HN critical of Rust (e.g., from a quick search there's [0, 1, 2] and plenty more, especially around async and/or deps). The key is to write substantive/thoughtful/constructive criticism. In fact, that applies in general - substantive/thoughtful/constructive articles/comments are much more likely to be well-received no matter their topic. This article does touch on some of Rust's weaknesses/pain points, but does an absolutely atrocious job of doing so. Right off the bat you have this: Example comparison (small benchmark): # C++ (g++) $ time g++ main.cpp -o main real 0m0.4s # Rust (cargo build --release) $ time cargo build --release real 0m9.7s Yes, Rust's compile times can be long, but if you wanted to demonstrate that then this is pretty much the worst possible way to do so as not only is it not comparing apples to apples (it's comparing a debug build to a release build) but we don't even know what is being compiled! And it's pretty much downhill from there. Like this: > Suddenly, the compiler starts screaming: error[E0515]: cannot return value referencing local variable Well yes, that's an error. It's also wrong in C++. In fact, C++26 makes (some forms?) a hard error as well, so C++ is moving to match Rust in this respect. The code organization example is yet again not an apples-to-apples comparison. It's also straight up wrong to boot. The migration decision tree is inconsistent as well. If "memory safety is your #1 priority", then C++ with sanitizers is definitely not a viable option. So on and so forth. If you want to write Rust criticism and be received well, this is definitely not the way to do so. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40172033 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40172033 [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36239534 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36239534 [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41791773 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41791773
- wakawaka28 11mo ago
  Much more superficial stuff flies on this site and even gets hundreds of upvotes. You haven't explained why this is flagged.

timeon 11mo ago

It is just rage-bait without content. Like made-up benchmark without specifying what it was comparing. Showing code that actually works and then providing error message that is not related or caused by that code. Etc.