4 ms·

“Not every one of those 11,970 carries the same weight, and the paper is careful about that rather than rounding it up.” AAUGH IT BURNS

• bcantrill 27d ago
  Right?! When I hit "That work was genuinely valuable" I literally hollered in exasperation.
  • juliansimioni 27d ago
    For me it was “the results speak for themselves” and then simply a (large) number of automated tests run that never had human eyes. Yes, quantity famously has a quality all its own, but perhaps not where correctness checks for something this central is concerned.
    • benmmurphy 27d ago
      I saw 'the results speak for themselves' but for me this article seemed to have less LLM-ese than some of the more recent obvious LLM prose posted to hackernews. As a reader I think its jarring because you just see a lot of articles purportedly written by different people using a very similar voice. I guess pre-LLM you might see this in a newspaper with very strong editorial oversight. So the phenomena is not completely new but it feels stranger when its not from a single source. It's also kind of sad to see a some people who have written a lot in the past about interesting technical topics in a way that was easy to read to give up their voice and outsource it to an LLM. But given this is basically free labour from the authors it feels a bit ungracious to complain.
      • sunshowers 27d ago
        My complaint is directed at the Rust Foundation, not the authors, to be clear. Yes, it's free labor, but the Foundation ought to have standards. I showed Bryan the post while in a meeting room with him, left the room, and a few minutes later heard a very loud, very exasperated primal scream coming from the room!