3 ms·
> If you’re judging my writing so shallowly, I don’t think I’m writing for you. No, you are writing for people who see LLM-signals and read on anyway. Not sur
by lelanthran 9mo ago
> If you’re judging my writing so shallowly, I don’t think I’m writing for you.
No, you are writing for people who see LLM-signals and read on anyway.
Not sure that that's a win for you.
- wrs 9mo ago"Seeing LLM-signals" == "reading shallowly", so I think I covered that case.
- kyralis 9mo agoOr you're writing for the people who haven't deluded themselves into thinking that they're magical LLM detectors, which definitely does seem like a win.
- lelanthran 9mo ago> Or you're writing for the people who haven't deluded themselves into thinking that they're magical LLM detectors, which definitely does seem like a win. What delusion? The false positive rate just on HN alone is so low it's not even a rounding error.