| ▲ | truetraveller 2 hours ago | |
Very likely AI slop, very hard to read. Too many indications. HN should have another rule: explicitly mention if article was written (primarily) by AI. | ||
| ▲ | antics 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
I'm the author. Literally 0% of this was written with AI. Not an outline, not the arguments, not a single word in any paragraph. We agonized over every aspect of this article: the wording, the structure, and in particular, about whether we were being fair to Yjs. We moved the second and third section around constantly. About a dozen people reviewed it and gave feedback. EDIT: I will say I'm not against AI writing tools or anything like that. But, for better or worse, that's just not what happened here. | ||
| ▲ | comex 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
It doesn’t strike me as AI. The writing is reasonably information-dense and specific, logically coherent, a bit emotional. Rarely overconfident or vague. If it is AI then there was a lot more human effort put into refining it than most AI writing I’ve read. | ||
| ▲ | utopiah 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Funnily enough I had 2 HN tabs open, this one and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47394004 | ||