4 ms·

> even Nvidia Why "even Nvidia"? They are fully behind using AI for basically everything. What's next? "Damn, even McDonald's is putting out unhealthy food"

deleted 19d ago
[deleted]
jchw 19d ago
Sure, but even Anthropic doesn't appear to use Claude for blog posts. (I don't think anyone should. The prose stinks.)
- keybrd-intrrpt 19d ago
  Anthropic _absolutely_ does They are just better at hiding it or configuring Claude. I have several skills that reformat text to remove AI-speak tells.
  - jchw 19d ago
    Prove it.
    - WD-42 19d ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49249269 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49249269 I put the "humanized" output through Pangram and it still comes out as 100% AI generated.
      - breezybottom 19d ago
        That's about as useful as saying you asked the magical sky fairy.
        jchw 19d ago
        I think you can't trust Pangram in a high stakes situation, but it is absolutely better than random noise at detecting AI-generated text. Which isn't surprising. If the distribution of probabilities can yield blatant Claudisms, it's not surprising it would also have more subtle deviations. (Addendum: As I recall, LLM-generated outputs roughly follow Zipf's law, but the distribution still tends to have some subtle distinctions vs human text; pretty interesting, but I don't know where I heard this, so nothing to cite. Sorry.)
        meowface 19d ago
        Pangram has an extremely low false positive rate. Even on adversarial examples. One trade-off is even some obviously LLM text won't get detected by them, but they work really hard to ensure false positives are rare since a false accusation is much worse for society than someone getting away with LLM meatpuppetry.
      - jchw 19d ago
        To be honest with you, I don't think I would be able to identify with high certainty that the bottom text is AI generated, so it definitely goes a long way to obscure the AI-generated nature of it, but I also think it still feels unnatural somehow. I realize my framing naturally calls into question whether I'm being honest, but I am being honest. Given my experience with similar "skills" (it's just chunks of prompt, nothing magical after all) I expected even less. But still, this is all very strange because it wasn't that many generations of AI models ago that AI writing was a lot better - I'm talking GPT 4.1, Claude 4.5, that sort of era. Anthropic newsroom posts on the other hand are carefully constructed and well-written in a way that I have not seen demonstrated by LLMs yet, past or present. I expect that they have well-paid staff who are careful with every detail of their public communications. When you put it that way, it almost feels unfathomable that they wouldn't, doesn't it?
        sebmellen 18d ago
        GPT 4.5 was really good.
    - saghm 19d ago
      I don't feel like either one of you really has a strong claim. "Doesn't appear to" is subjective, and of course it's impossible to prove one way or another.
      - jchw 18d ago
        You're simplifying the exchange a little too much. I said: > Anthropic doesn't appear to use Claude for blog posts My claim is literally the lack of evidence, which, yes, can't prove anything. This claim can be contested easily by showing evidence that they in fact, do appear to be using Claude to write prose in blog posts. They said: > Anthropic _absolutely_ does Sounds pretty certain Anthropic is in fact, using Claude to write blog posts. Enough to emphasize "absolutely". That doesn't read like "I'm going off of vibes", that reads like "I can prove it". So, fine. Prove it. I don't believe it, and I want to hear the proof. I'm skeptical, but it wouldn't be my first time being wrong. But flatly, if you make claims with this kind of certainty, yes I want to hear your proof. My point in saying "Even Anthropic doesn't appear to be using Claude for blog posts" was not meant to be some striking revelation, I literally was considering it a prior to make another point. This on the other hand sure does sound like a striking revelation to me, that a lot of people across the Internet would be curious to hear. Like I'm sure these people would be interested: https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1wdfd92/are_anthropic_press_releasesreports_written_by_a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1wdfd92/are_anthr... I will admit that I am unnecessarily aggressive sometimes, but I wouldn't have changed my response much in any case. If you're going to make a strong claim like this, I want your evidence, not your vibes. Otherwise, the claim should be a lot weaker. I also realize that this sort of brashness upsets HN a bit, but it is what it is. I pandered comments for votes in my 20s a bit, time to grow up, sometimes people won't like you. Sometimes I feel something deserves a brash response.
        saghm 18d ago
        I don't really have any opinion on your tone; I just still don't agree with your framing. A lack of evidence would be neutral like "there's no evidence to indicate either possibility is more likely", but your phrasing conveyed that one possibility was more likely than the other. I pushed back against your follow-up because it seemed like you were arguing for a higher threshold of evidence than you provided.
  - rkharsan64 18d ago
    According to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49417480 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49417480, Anthropic hires writers who do not use LLMs, and reading their updates I also feel that they don't use LLMs for communication.
huflungdung 19d ago
[dead]
manquer 19d ago
I think implication being organizations with 40,000+ employees and even more consultants and contractors plus a lot of budget are also using LLMs to draft public facing content instead of paying for content writers or even just proof readers . It points to friction rather than cost economics. Same reason we are always surprised why multi billion dollar product companies with millions of install base prefer electron instead of a native app.
- freeopinion 19d ago
  This does not imply that the organization is not paying for content writers or proof readers. It does suggest that they are not getting the value of paying for content writers or proof readers.
  - simpaticoder 19d ago
    It does suggest that they are not accurately measuring the value of paying for content writers or proof readers. People and companies are hungry for knowledge about people's reactions, but the modern internet DOES NOT give an accurate image of people's views.
  - latentsea 19d ago
    No. It suggests they don't mind littering slop into the information environment.
- pjmlp 18d ago
  Of course, that is the whole point of using AI to replace workers. Only devs think it isn't coming for them, it is empowering and nothing else will happen, no team reductions, nah how come.
dannyw 19d ago
I believe most of their marketing videos use fairly convincing text to speech too, not voice actors.
dprkh 19d ago
McDonald's food is not even that unhealthy. I just tried a Burger King burger the other day and it's terrible. I think it's like 2000 calories in a single burger or something.
- calvinmorrison 19d ago
  found the McShill. The King will hear of this!
- timacles 19d ago
  > I think it's like 2000 calories in a single burger that would be pretty cool, you can just get your entire day's calories from one burger
  - dprkh 19d ago
    I couldn't even finish it man, it was so fucking sloppy. I had to throw away like 40% of it.
- xxs 18d ago
  2k cal would be around 250ml of oil. or 350grams of peanuts. So doing with bread, meat, and other stuff alike requires over 600g of food, an excellent value to energy.
- Dylan16807 17d ago
  Big Mac 580 calories, Whopper 680 calories. At least based on the first official numbers in each google search. They both have a variety of sizes but it's a similar range and they have similar contents.
saghm 19d ago
Their CEO also has the dubious distinction of claiming we've reached AGI more then once: https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/985597/jensen-huang-says-nvidia-achieved-senseless-agi https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/985597/j...
RickHull 19d ago
Is Jensen Huang still all-in on OpenClaw? That moment feels more like a flash in the pan.

deleted 19d ago

[deleted]

jchw 19d ago

Sure, but even Anthropic doesn't appear to use Claude for blog posts. (I don't think anyone should. The prose stinks.)

keybrd-intrrpt 19d ago
Anthropic _absolutely_ does They are just better at hiding it or configuring Claude. I have several skills that reformat text to remove AI-speak tells.
- jchw 19d ago
  Prove it.
  - WD-42 19d ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49249269 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49249269 I put the "humanized" output through Pangram and it still comes out as 100% AI generated.
    - breezybottom 19d ago
      That's about as useful as saying you asked the magical sky fairy.
      - jchw 19d ago
        I think you can't trust Pangram in a high stakes situation, but it is absolutely better than random noise at detecting AI-generated text. Which isn't surprising. If the distribution of probabilities can yield blatant Claudisms, it's not surprising it would also have more subtle deviations. (Addendum: As I recall, LLM-generated outputs roughly follow Zipf's law, but the distribution still tends to have some subtle distinctions vs human text; pretty interesting, but I don't know where I heard this, so nothing to cite. Sorry.)
      - meowface 19d ago
        Pangram has an extremely low false positive rate. Even on adversarial examples. One trade-off is even some obviously LLM text won't get detected by them, but they work really hard to ensure false positives are rare since a false accusation is much worse for society than someone getting away with LLM meatpuppetry.
    - jchw 19d ago
      To be honest with you, I don't think I would be able to identify with high certainty that the bottom text is AI generated, so it definitely goes a long way to obscure the AI-generated nature of it, but I also think it still feels unnatural somehow. I realize my framing naturally calls into question whether I'm being honest, but I am being honest. Given my experience with similar "skills" (it's just chunks of prompt, nothing magical after all) I expected even less. But still, this is all very strange because it wasn't that many generations of AI models ago that AI writing was a lot better - I'm talking GPT 4.1, Claude 4.5, that sort of era. Anthropic newsroom posts on the other hand are carefully constructed and well-written in a way that I have not seen demonstrated by LLMs yet, past or present. I expect that they have well-paid staff who are careful with every detail of their public communications. When you put it that way, it almost feels unfathomable that they wouldn't, doesn't it?
      - sebmellen 18d ago
        GPT 4.5 was really good.
  - saghm 19d ago
    I don't feel like either one of you really has a strong claim. "Doesn't appear to" is subjective, and of course it's impossible to prove one way or another.
    - jchw 18d ago
      You're simplifying the exchange a little too much. I said: > Anthropic doesn't appear to use Claude for blog posts My claim is literally the lack of evidence, which, yes, can't prove anything. This claim can be contested easily by showing evidence that they in fact, do appear to be using Claude to write prose in blog posts. They said: > Anthropic _absolutely_ does Sounds pretty certain Anthropic is in fact, using Claude to write blog posts. Enough to emphasize "absolutely". That doesn't read like "I'm going off of vibes", that reads like "I can prove it". So, fine. Prove it. I don't believe it, and I want to hear the proof. I'm skeptical, but it wouldn't be my first time being wrong. But flatly, if you make claims with this kind of certainty, yes I want to hear your proof. My point in saying "Even Anthropic doesn't appear to be using Claude for blog posts" was not meant to be some striking revelation, I literally was considering it a prior to make another point. This on the other hand sure does sound like a striking revelation to me, that a lot of people across the Internet would be curious to hear. Like I'm sure these people would be interested: https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1wdfd92/are_anthropic_press_releasesreports_written_by_a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1wdfd92/are_anthr... I will admit that I am unnecessarily aggressive sometimes, but I wouldn't have changed my response much in any case. If you're going to make a strong claim like this, I want your evidence, not your vibes. Otherwise, the claim should be a lot weaker. I also realize that this sort of brashness upsets HN a bit, but it is what it is. I pandered comments for votes in my 20s a bit, time to grow up, sometimes people won't like you. Sometimes I feel something deserves a brash response.
      - saghm 18d ago
        I don't really have any opinion on your tone; I just still don't agree with your framing. A lack of evidence would be neutral like "there's no evidence to indicate either possibility is more likely", but your phrasing conveyed that one possibility was more likely than the other. I pushed back against your follow-up because it seemed like you were arguing for a higher threshold of evidence than you provided.
- rkharsan64 18d ago
  According to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49417480 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49417480, Anthropic hires writers who do not use LLMs, and reading their updates I also feel that they don't use LLMs for communication.

huflungdung 19d ago

[dead]

manquer 19d ago

I think implication being organizations with 40,000+ employees and even more consultants and contractors plus a lot of budget are also using LLMs to draft public facing content instead of paying for content writers or even just proof readers . It points to friction rather than cost economics. Same reason we are always surprised why multi billion dollar product companies with millions of install base prefer electron instead of a native app.

freeopinion 19d ago
This does not imply that the organization is not paying for content writers or proof readers. It does suggest that they are not getting the value of paying for content writers or proof readers.
- simpaticoder 19d ago
  It does suggest that they are not accurately measuring the value of paying for content writers or proof readers. People and companies are hungry for knowledge about people's reactions, but the modern internet DOES NOT give an accurate image of people's views.
- latentsea 19d ago
  No. It suggests they don't mind littering slop into the information environment.
pjmlp 18d ago
Of course, that is the whole point of using AI to replace workers. Only devs think it isn't coming for them, it is empowering and nothing else will happen, no team reductions, nah how come.

dannyw 19d ago

I believe most of their marketing videos use fairly convincing text to speech too, not voice actors.

dprkh 19d ago

McDonald's food is not even that unhealthy. I just tried a Burger King burger the other day and it's terrible. I think it's like 2000 calories in a single burger or something.

calvinmorrison 19d ago
found the McShill. The King will hear of this!
timacles 19d ago
> I think it's like 2000 calories in a single burger that would be pretty cool, you can just get your entire day's calories from one burger
- dprkh 19d ago
  I couldn't even finish it man, it was so fucking sloppy. I had to throw away like 40% of it.
xxs 18d ago
2k cal would be around 250ml of oil. or 350grams of peanuts. So doing with bread, meat, and other stuff alike requires over 600g of food, an excellent value to energy.
Dylan16807 17d ago
Big Mac 580 calories, Whopper 680 calories. At least based on the first official numbers in each google search. They both have a variety of sizes but it's a similar range and they have similar contents.

saghm 19d ago

Their CEO also has the dubious distinction of claiming we've reached AGI more then once: https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/985597/jensen-huang-says-nvidia-achieved-senseless-agi https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/985597/j...

RickHull 19d ago

Is Jensen Huang still all-in on OpenClaw? That moment feels more like a flash in the pan.