4 ms·

I wish! It would have saved so many hours and drafts….

by andros 2mo ago

KolmogorovComp 2mo ago
> The number is real. But there's a catch. > The gap vanishes. It isn't measuring WebSocket against SSE, it's measuring > And here is the deeper part the reply misses: > In short, it isn't a structural problem, it's a design one. > The real argument isn't the wire, it's the architecture > Where SSE genuinely wins > What really separates the two models is the architecture
- lukeholder 2mo ago
  Yep all very clearly AI writing.
  - andros 2mo ago
    [flagged]
    - JodieBenitez 2mo ago
      Here’s a little analogy: I’ve been composing electronic music for 35 years now, and some people still think it’s just a matter of pressing buttons, that it’s easy, that anyone can do it the same way, that I do this because I don’t have what it takes to learn to play a “real instrument” and that I’m not a “real musician”. You get used to it, and eventually you stop caring. Too bad for them if they’re more interested in the process than in the work itself.
      - andros 2mo ago
        Thank you for sharing your experience and story! Amidst the noise, it's rewarding. Good luck with your compositions.
      - IshKebab 2mo ago
        I don't think that's a good analogy. Learning a "real" instrument is extremely difficult and takes thousands of hours. Writing your own blog post without AI takes like half an hour.
        JodieBenitez 2mo ago
        I don't think you thought this through. Learning to write is also very difficult and time consuming. Also you missed the point.
        IshKebab 2mo ago
        It's not really because everyone learns at school. And in fact it only takes a few years (my kids are going through it now and I was surprised at how quickly they went from not being able to read at all, to having better handwriting than me). It's like, learning a language is really hard. Learning your native language is super easy, barely an inconvenience. So I think I would be more accepting if he said "sorry I can't speak English because it's a second language so I used AI to help", but he didn't.
        KolmogorovComp 2mo ago
        I think you both had a different meaning behind the verb 'write'. You clearly refer to the physical act of writing, while OP refer's to writing as an author (ie be enjoyable to read), which most people never achieve.
        IshKebab 2mo ago
        No I mean that too. We aren't talking Tolkien. It's a technical blog post. It doesn't have to be a literary work of art. Anyone (well, anyone intelligent enough to debate the merits or Websockets) can write that.
    - nchmy 2mo ago
      Third option: just be honest. Perhaps even apologize. The post is unequivocally Ai slop. Moreover, the style doesn't match your comments here, or other blog posts, at all.
    - sudodevnull 2mo ago
      Because you are actively hurting projects that do care
    - NoDodgeQuestion 2mo ago
      blog now disclose: "AI is one more tool. I use it for mechanical tasks: polishing the wording, catching typos, suggesting synonyms, improving or adapting code blocks and translating the article between Spanish and English."
- sorry_i_lisp 2mo ago
  > drk points out that the SSE stream is one-way but your app isn't oops
fwip 2mo ago
I don't know why you think you can lie about this. https://www.pangram.com/history/3e369754-75da-4922-8386-c0f3b360247f?ucc=WGvBwnI2E19 https://www.pangram.com/history/3e369754-75da-4922-8386-c0f3... (Cue pivot to "oh, I only meant that it wasn't slop, I never pretended that I wrote a single word of it.")
AloysB 2mo ago
Hm, Andros I do have my doubts - I know that you are a proponent of generative AI. We had a discussion over your outspoken opposition to https://human-emacs.org/ https://human-emacs.org/. I also know that you are an excellent writer/thinker, even prior to the advent of generative AI. I'm in two minds here, and don't want to insinuate that you are outright lying, but I do believe your workflow relies on generative AI. There is value in disclosing how you use generative AI to help you write articles. See https://www.bydamo.la/p/ai-manifesto https://www.bydamo.la/p/ai-manifesto or https://sive.rs/ai https://sive.rs/ai. If you do use generative AI, may I suggest that you review the choice of licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ > NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material. If you do use generative AI, it feels hypocritical to use this licence while using a technology that essentially tries to circumvent the copyright issue by remixing, transforming and building upon the material it has ingested.
- andros 2mo ago
  [flagged]
  - AloysB 2mo ago
    > This kind of comment loses a lot of its weight by being posted here on HN instead of sent privately. If this were really a good-faith question, a DM would have done it. I'm sorry if it came across as a personal attack, it wasn't the intention. It felt like the right place to comment. The article is public, the accusations are public, the licence is public and you made your position on generative AI public on the human-emacs project. You expressed your position on the human-emacs publicly and we had a good discussion over it, in public. To me, this was on the same level. I don't think that half of a conversation should be done via DM, while the other is made public. > This is the real damage this kind of thing does. It breaks the quiet deal that used to exist between a writer and a reader: you put out content, and got at least some minimal credit for the work behind it. Now there's none of that left. No credit, no gratitude, not even the confidence that a human read it. That's exactly why there's less and less original content being written. I agree, but you have to blame the right entity here. It's not the readers' fault that a deluge of AI generated content flooded the internet. Generative AI broke that "quiet deal", not the readers. The readers are as much a victim as is the author who writes the content. Generative AI came with a ton of negative side effects for the entire population. This is one of them. Interestingly enough I read your article in elfeed, and came here for the comments as I was getting suspicious of the use of generative AI, which I refuse to read. The sentence that pushed my suspicions over the edge is the follow up article (https://en.andros.dev/blog/bd74e61a/were-fighting-over-the-wrong-wire-websockets-vs-sse-for-html-over-the-wire/ https://en.andros.dev/blog/bd74e61a/were-fighting-over-the-w...) which starts with: > A while ago I published HTML over WebSockets. "A while ago" being the day before. EDIT: on second thought, you might have drafted this weeks before publishing and simply forgot to edit it out.
_se 2mo ago
It's so, so clearly written by Claude. What are you talking about. Do you really think that you can fool people with so little effort?

I wish! It would have saved so many hours and drafts….

by andros 2mo ago

I wish! It would have saved so many hours and drafts….

> The number is real. But there's a catch. > The gap vanishes. It isn't measuring WebSocket against SSE, it's measuring > And here is the deeper part the reply misses: > In short, it isn't a structural problem, it's a design one. > The real argument isn't the wire, it's the architecture > Where SSE genuinely wins > What really separates the two models is the architecture

lukeholder 2mo ago
Yep all very clearly AI writing.
- andros 2mo ago
  [flagged]
  - JodieBenitez 2mo ago
    Here’s a little analogy: I’ve been composing electronic music for 35 years now, and some people still think it’s just a matter of pressing buttons, that it’s easy, that anyone can do it the same way, that I do this because I don’t have what it takes to learn to play a “real instrument” and that I’m not a “real musician”. You get used to it, and eventually you stop caring. Too bad for them if they’re more interested in the process than in the work itself.
    - andros 2mo ago
      Thank you for sharing your experience and story! Amidst the noise, it's rewarding. Good luck with your compositions.
    - IshKebab 2mo ago
      I don't think that's a good analogy. Learning a "real" instrument is extremely difficult and takes thousands of hours. Writing your own blog post without AI takes like half an hour.
      - JodieBenitez 2mo ago
        I don't think you thought this through. Learning to write is also very difficult and time consuming. Also you missed the point.
        IshKebab 2mo ago
        It's not really because everyone learns at school. And in fact it only takes a few years (my kids are going through it now and I was surprised at how quickly they went from not being able to read at all, to having better handwriting than me). It's like, learning a language is really hard. Learning your native language is super easy, barely an inconvenience. So I think I would be more accepting if he said "sorry I can't speak English because it's a second language so I used AI to help", but he didn't.
        KolmogorovComp 2mo ago
        I think you both had a different meaning behind the verb 'write'. You clearly refer to the physical act of writing, while OP refer's to writing as an author (ie be enjoyable to read), which most people never achieve.
        IshKebab 2mo ago
        No I mean that too. We aren't talking Tolkien. It's a technical blog post. It doesn't have to be a literary work of art. Anyone (well, anyone intelligent enough to debate the merits or Websockets) can write that.
  - nchmy 2mo ago
    Third option: just be honest. Perhaps even apologize. The post is unequivocally Ai slop. Moreover, the style doesn't match your comments here, or other blog posts, at all.
  - sudodevnull 2mo ago
    Because you are actively hurting projects that do care
  - NoDodgeQuestion 2mo ago
    blog now disclose: "AI is one more tool. I use it for mechanical tasks: polishing the wording, catching typos, suggesting synonyms, improving or adapting code blocks and translating the article between Spanish and English."
sorry_i_lisp 2mo ago
> drk points out that the SSE stream is one-way but your app isn't oops

fwip 2mo ago

I don't know why you think you can lie about this. https://www.pangram.com/history/3e369754-75da-4922-8386-c0f3b360247f?ucc=WGvBwnI2E19 https://www.pangram.com/history/3e369754-75da-4922-8386-c0f3... (Cue pivot to "oh, I only meant that it wasn't slop, I never pretended that I wrote a single word of it.")

AloysB 2mo ago

Hm, Andros I do have my doubts - I know that you are a proponent of generative AI. We had a discussion over your outspoken opposition to https://human-emacs.org/ https://human-emacs.org/. I also know that you are an excellent writer/thinker, even prior to the advent of generative AI. I'm in two minds here, and don't want to insinuate that you are outright lying, but I do believe your workflow relies on generative AI. There is value in disclosing how you use generative AI to help you write articles. See https://www.bydamo.la/p/ai-manifesto https://www.bydamo.la/p/ai-manifesto or https://sive.rs/ai https://sive.rs/ai. If you do use generative AI, may I suggest that you review the choice of licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ > NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material. If you do use generative AI, it feels hypocritical to use this licence while using a technology that essentially tries to circumvent the copyright issue by remixing, transforming and building upon the material it has ingested.

andros 2mo ago
[flagged]
- AloysB 2mo ago
  > This kind of comment loses a lot of its weight by being posted here on HN instead of sent privately. If this were really a good-faith question, a DM would have done it. I'm sorry if it came across as a personal attack, it wasn't the intention. It felt like the right place to comment. The article is public, the accusations are public, the licence is public and you made your position on generative AI public on the human-emacs project. You expressed your position on the human-emacs publicly and we had a good discussion over it, in public. To me, this was on the same level. I don't think that half of a conversation should be done via DM, while the other is made public. > This is the real damage this kind of thing does. It breaks the quiet deal that used to exist between a writer and a reader: you put out content, and got at least some minimal credit for the work behind it. Now there's none of that left. No credit, no gratitude, not even the confidence that a human read it. That's exactly why there's less and less original content being written. I agree, but you have to blame the right entity here. It's not the readers' fault that a deluge of AI generated content flooded the internet. Generative AI broke that "quiet deal", not the readers. The readers are as much a victim as is the author who writes the content. Generative AI came with a ton of negative side effects for the entire population. This is one of them. Interestingly enough I read your article in elfeed, and came here for the comments as I was getting suspicious of the use of generative AI, which I refuse to read. The sentence that pushed my suspicions over the edge is the follow up article (https://en.andros.dev/blog/bd74e61a/were-fighting-over-the-wrong-wire-websockets-vs-sse-for-html-over-the-wire/ https://en.andros.dev/blog/bd74e61a/were-fighting-over-the-w...) which starts with: > A while ago I published HTML over WebSockets. "A while ago" being the day before. EDIT: on second thought, you might have drafted this weeks before publishing and simply forgot to edit it out.

_se 2mo ago

It's so, so clearly written by Claude. What are you talking about. Do you really think that you can fool people with so little effort?