the whole blog post and all the author's replies are authored by an LLM.

albertsikkema 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Funny, actually not the case. Co-authored partly yes, mainly to compensate for my lack of knowledge of the intricacies of English (not my native language). Anyway: take from it what you want, if it helps you: nice! Else: have fun doing something else.

▲

frumplestlatz 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Seems so. It should be much more explicitly disclaimed.

▲

albertsikkema 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Interesting that you feel this is necessary. Why would a disclaimer be needed? If I read the technical docs for a library and use that in my code, should I explicitly mention that I got this from the docs? I know a lot, but am happy to admit I do not know everything, so I am happy to use tools that help me. And I got what I wanted in the end: being able to continue with my real work: helping a client.

	▲	voidUpdate 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		This felt like an article of "This is how I worked this out". If you found something out through the docs, I'd be interested to know that. If you found it out through asking an LLM, that would be helpful to know as well. Maybe other people would write that kind of article differently, but when I write them, I try to put in as much detail as I can about how I worked something out, in case it's useful to other people
	▲	frumplestlatz 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> When a human presents work under their own name, there is an unspoken but widely relied-upon assumption that the presenter has exercised judgment over the space of possible choices and can explain why these ones were taken. > … > If you attach your name to work, you are asserting that you can meaningfully answer “why this and not something else?” across the decisions that matter. Tools that produce answers faster than humans think require new language, because our old words still imply thought occurred.