4 ms·
Thanks for the writeup, claude
by Retr0id 3mo ago
Thanks for the writeup, claude
- _alternator_ 3mo agoYeah, interesting finding in the headline, the rest is just Claude.
- userbinator 3mo ago[flagged]
- ddtaylor 3mo ago[flagged]
- Retr0id 3mo agoAnd the other half of the community seems fixated on upvoting AI slop.
- ddtaylor 3mo agoSounds needlessly divisive. Why not criticize the content instead of the source or medium?
- queenkjuul 3mo ago"The content is AI slop and not worth reading"
- fragmede 3mo agoWe all want signal and no noise, but complaining about whether or not it's noise is just more noise.
- queenkjuul 3mo agoIt's a signal to those who haven't read it yet that it isn't worth reading
- ddtaylor 3mo agoMy 8 year old nefew can come into random HN threads and post "this is trash yo" and that would also be the same signal I suppose.
- ddtaylor 3mo agoNone of that is specific to the actual content. Might as well just say "I don't like it" which is also not objective analysis. This article was about math functions, chrome, etc. If the author got something wrong, mention that, or if you don't like the pacing or how the content was divided into pieces, etc.
- Iggyhopper 3mo agoAll of the issues with AI generated content can be explained further and in-depth because it has such a unique fingerprint in the pacing, verbosity, long-winded explanations, etc.. It also shows lack of effort. Just give me the prompt and the findings, I can write the article. AI slop is a category and is categorically irritating to read, and not worth reading.
- Retr0id 3mo agoThe medium is the message, which is especially true when it exists as content-marketing for their anti-anti-scraping product for AI companies to use to improve their ability to emulate blogs, among other things.
- ddtaylor 3mo agoThose are closer to real objective analysis. Much better than hand waving near LLMs and dismissing the content without articulating why. My guess is that a comment that directly says that doesn't get as much traction and depending on how straight-faced it was could be violating the guidelines on accusing someone of manipulating HN, etc.
- Retr0id 3mo agoI'm happy with how much I said in my original comment, too. It's mostly subtext.
- xpct 3mo agoWhy's that bad? It's valuable to discuss whether a presentation should have been a blog post, a video, or a tech talk. The same logic applies to LLM text. If people consistently describe LLM text as having low information density or irritating to read, perhaps there's something to it?
- gdwatson 3mo agoI am not so paranoid, and I haven’t been working with AI, so my AI-dar is bad. But I keep reading technical writeups like this, then getting frustrated at the writing style or incomplete explanation – this one was more complete than most, though it was repetitive. Then I come read the HN comments, and I see that it was LLM-generated. (To be fair, this one says so up top. Even so my eyes skipped over it.) So I find the reaction helpful. I want to read posts in the best human style, but if the angry mob can’t motivate those, at least I can notice the pitchforks and torches, slap my forehead, and say, “Oh, that explains it.”
- Retr0id 3mo agoOoh, the disclaimer is new, it wasn't there originally: https://web.archive.org/web/20260712212920/https://scrapfly.dev/posts/browser-math-os-fingerprint/ https://web.archive.org/web/20260712212920/https://scrapfly....
- jofzar 3mo agoDamn I literally came here to say "it's nice to see an actual disclaimer!"
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- vlian2088 3mo ago[flagged]
- ddtaylor 3mo agoIn this case someone could argue you are very verbose, needlessly breaking things into lists, and comparing or contrasting things that don't have much impact or relation. None of this is new to AI. Top ten lists, spam, etc. have existed for a long time. If you want to disagree with someone on the Internet, you do have to actually articulate what your gripes are to some extent beyond just hand waving near LLMs, etc.
- bachmitre 3mo agoThis! Very interest in where this would lead.
- ksenzee 3mo agoI don’t know whether you wrote this by hand in the most painfully LLM style you could gin up, or whether you got an LLM to do it for you, but either way I tip my hat to you.
- dang 3mo agoCan you please not post AI-generated or AI-edited comments to HN? It's not allowed here - see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#generated https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#generated and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47340079 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47340079. Of course, it's impossible to know for sure what was LLM processed or not, but some of your posts (like this one) have been getting classified that way.
- vlian2088 3mo agoif your classifier had classified anything other than that comment (clearly satirical, come the fuck on) and the deleted attempts to get it past your spam filter, then it is a touch too sensitive.
- 3mo ago
- isiahl 3mo agoWhat I think is crazy are the links at the top to summarize the article with your preferred AI provider. The prompt asks it to summarize the article along with an advertisement for their product. This is the prompt I got when clicking the Claude link: > summarize+this+article+and+explain+how+scrapfly+helps+me+scrape+any+website+at+scale+and+bypass+anti-bot+systems+for+my+use+case:+https://scrapfly.dev/posts/browser-math-os-fingerprint/ https://scrapfly.dev/posts/browser-math-os-fingerprint/