Is it just me or is this article insanely confusing? With all due respect to the author, please be mindful of copy editing LLM-assisted writing.

There is a really interesting discussion underneath of this as to the limitations of JSON along with potential alternatives, but I can't help but distrust this writing due to how much it sounds like an LLM.

▲

phyzome an hour ago | parent | next [-]

It wasn't confusing, but yeah, it smelled strongly of LLMs.

▲

port11 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't think it's LLM-generated or even assisted. It's kinda like how I write when I don't want to really argue a point but rather get to the good bits.

Seems like the author just wanted to talk about Protobuf without bothering too much about the issues with JSON (though some are mentioned).

▲

pavel_lishin 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Is it just me or is this article insanely confusing?

I didn't find it confusing.

I found it unconvincing, but the argument itself was pretty clear. I just disagreed with it.

▲

dkdcio 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

do you have any evidence that the author used a LLM? focusing on the content, instead of the tooling used to write the content, leads to a lot more productive discussions

I promise you cannot tell LLM-generated content from non-LLM generated content. what you think you’re detecting is poor quality, which is orthogonal to the tooling used

	▲	spagoop 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Fair point, to be constructive here, LLMs seem to love lists and emphasizing random words / phrases with bold. Those two are everywhere. Not a smoking gun but enough to tune out. I am not dismissing this as being slop and actually have no beef with using LLMs to write but yes, as you call out, I think it's just poorly written or perhaps I'm not the specific audience for this. Sorry if this is bad energy, I appreciate the write up regardless.