3 ms·
I like how one of the reference links betrays how the article itself was researched, possibly written; HN hides the end of the url, which is "utm_source=chatgpt
by pixelpoet 11mo ago
I like how one of the reference links betrays how the article itself was researched, possibly written; HN hides the end of the url, which is "utm_source=chatgpt.com":
> https://www.economist.com/business/2025/11/19/cracks-are-appearing-in-openais-dominant-facade?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.economist.com/business/2025/11/19/cracks-are-app...
You have to appreciate the irony :)
- NathanielK 11mo agoThe real disappointment is none of the sources are linked in the text. Instead, it's just random underlined words, the classic chatgpt over formatting with lots of extra underlining and bolding. I appreciate that a 10-15 minute long article summarizes a 25 minute video, but it's hard to hide the real author. Quite lazily done and just not pleasant to read.
- potamic 11mo agoWould it be as ironic if one wrote an article about Google and used Google search to research their sources?
- pixelpoet 11mo agoIf the article were about Google ruining everything, yes.
- zerosizedweasle 11mo agoNo because google can both ruin things and be a tool that is helpful in certain circumstances
- oasisbob 11mo agoQuality of the writing and thought also reveals the construction method.