relevant_stats

3 ms·

1.
by relevant_stats 7d ago
> they imagine their a newly found ability to spot design generated with AI equates to them being able to spot bad design. Who is imagining that? > No, you silly geese. What you are able to spot is somebody using AI poorly. That'
2.
by relevant_stats 12d ago
> You can't call people lazy because they use LLMs I haven't done that at all.
3.
by relevant_stats 12d ago
You claim they think they have to listen to missionaries?
4.
by relevant_stats 12d ago
> If they work, does it matter? The blog post provides something akin to answer to this question: You see, the main allure of LLMs is that they allow the developer to be more lazy. That’s kind of the whole point! You just prompt, sit ba
5.
by relevant_stats 12d ago
> They see it as some great holy mission from god to go out into the hinterlands and convert the local people from their local existing belief system to their own particular form of Christianity. Call me apologist, but I can see no real
6.
by relevant_stats 20d ago
> I don't agree. Good writing and good ideas are entirely different things. Just read all the beautifully written, inaccurate stuff by the NYT or the Guardian. I'd be very curious of some examples when great ideas are being pre
7.
by relevant_stats 24d ago
"Too long" is a property visible from the very start. "written by an LLM" is not. Any better advice?
8.
by relevant_stats 24d ago
Ok, tell me then how exactly can I "not read it" when it's NOT disclosed? The subject interests me so I'm beginning to read, only to waste minutes of my precious life on realising this is another long-winded slop. How sh
9.
by relevant_stats 24d ago
> I dont get the investment in humanoids beyond trying to create some kind of stock market bubble again. Our entire world is heavily adjusted towards bipedal humanoid creatures. Having a moving humanoid tool who could replace some of our
10.
by relevant_stats 24d ago
The heavy usage of LLM writing as is the case here is a strong signal it doesn't and isn't. I won't waste my time on a person who didn't bother to express themselves.
11.
by relevant_stats 24d ago
I'm really sick of LLM writing.
12.
by relevant_stats 24d ago
Oh, use they did, 100% Pangram score for a whole text doesn't come from small polish.
13.
by relevant_stats 2mo ago
Of course it is. And as usual the comment pointing this out is being downvoted and only to be found at the end of the thread. This aggregator's community approach to important signals like that is baffling.
14.
by relevant_stats 2mo ago
It's worse than that, the underlying data is more than questionable.
15.
by relevant_stats 2mo ago
This is not a "map of castles". I checked my local area, and it omits interesting castles , instead including palaces, landmarks and world war era fortresses. Shameful submission.
16.
by relevant_stats 3mo ago
You've confused the threads: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48523992
17.
by relevant_stats 4mo ago
How exactly is existence of the "Get a free trial" banner an "opinion"?
18.
by relevant_stats 4mo ago
I'd be interested to test your claim, could you show me examples of this "prompt or two"?
19.
by relevant_stats 4mo ago
Seriously? - Marketing material? check - Bloated to the extreme? check - "Get a free trial" at the end? check - Entirely LLM generated? check
20.
by relevant_stats 4mo ago
Yes, and the problem we are having here is 'raw' output. LLMgenerated slop is zero-effort bullshit, not an elaborate scheme to prove a philosophical thesis. There is no economy for mediaworkers doing the latter. Similar as with co
21.
by relevant_stats 4mo ago
I don't know what your experience is, according to mine there are some people who are better than chance at picking this up. And I believe my experience is something expected. People are also certain kind of a neural network. If an LLM
22.
by relevant_stats 4mo ago
As of now there are only two somewhat reliable tools. First one is Pangram. Other available detectors are varying level of bad, with some of them entirely shit (eg zerogpt something). The second one is human mind. Read enough of that slop a
23.
by relevant_stats 4mo ago
Äh, was?
24.
by relevant_stats 4mo ago
So, snippet from the article says the following: > I understand that Microsoft is planning to remove most of its Claude Code licenses and push many of its developers to use Copilot CLI instead. While Claude Code has been a popular additi
25.
by relevant_stats 4mo ago
Hacker News has developed recently a frustrating habit of upvoting such low quality AI sloppy submissions. Makes me wonder if this AI flood uncovers the unflattering truth about this community acuteness, or it's only a failure of exist
26.
by relevant_stats 4mo ago
Reading this to the very end uncovers empty and contradictory advice. I'm almost sure it's LLM generated. We learn simultaneously that 'your team' shouldn't rely on any one of those patterns ('none of them is e
27.
by relevant_stats 5mo ago
The stats are wrong - on Android my finger has not moved triple digit times, and I haven't tapped double digit times. In 4 seconds. My general location is also wrong. This site's theme is barely visible. And the entire idea for th
28.
by relevant_stats 5mo ago
> it's not crap because it's AI generated, it's crap because I can tell it's AI generated, full of fluff, cliches and a lack of substance. Yes, exactly this. If I notice it means your PhD-level 2027 ASI technology fa
29.
by relevant_stats 5mo ago
> I downvote them because they are tangential to the content. They are like complaints about scroll bars and back button hijacking, or annoyances about the website's color scheme I don't agree with you. They are not at all like
30.
by relevant_stats 5mo ago
> I think your comment was maybe downvoted for being so terse and dismissive. Yes, I know, but what motivated me to ask was that from my observations also less derisive comments raising AI point are prone to being downvoted. Like this co

More ›