3 ms·
> If this, then that. No point in reading some distilled, glossed over LLM bullshit. My advice would be to get used to this style, or otherwise you'd risk to m
by BoredomIsFun 8mo ago
> If this, then that. No point in reading some distilled, glossed over LLM bullshit.
My advice would be to get used to this style, or otherwise you'd risk to miss out lots of interesting articles.
- Citizen_Lame 8mo agoI can generate my own interesting articles. Just skip the middleman.
- BoredomIsFun 8mo agoYou can do it, yes. But use of LLMs is not a binary variable - a merely polished text might look like a generated one in its entirety. So you if you prioritize "human-looking" context (I do not) you'd be in disadvantage.
- marcelox86 8mo ago> My advice would be to get used to this style this style is like nails on a chalkboard. if they can’t care enough to make it readable, then they couldn’t pay me to care to read it
- BoredomIsFun 7mo agoOnce your got used to it, it even easier to read than human one, as you brain learns to ignore the structure enforced by LLM, an it always the same. YMMV, but to me, this style is grating, yes, but easier to parse, nonetheless.