> When code production gets cheap, the cost doesn't disappear. It migrates.

I'm surprised people aren't taking the time to edit this very specific kind of phrasing out of their writing. It's such a common AI tell now that, even when writing by hand, I'd just avoid it entirely.

Then again, I hated that LLMs co-opted the em-dash, and I refuse to stop using it, so I suppose I get it.

▲

Terr_ 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> to edit this very specific kind of phrasing out of their writing

Even without touching moral/ethical/normative reasons, it's impractical. LLMs will continue to incorporate the most popular phrasings or grammars, and touchy readers will simply pivot to a new "telltale" du-jour.

Eventually any personal or organic writing will be gone, as one twists themselves into an artificial form of "the inverse of the LLM."

> Michael Bolton: "No way, why should I change? He's the one who sucks."

	▲	csallen 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Even without touching moral/ethical/normative reasons, it's impractical. It's impractical to edit your AI-generated writing to put it in your own voice? People have been writing unique stuff for millennia.

▲

teiferer 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Why would they have to? Just to avoid being accused of using a slop machine? If that is the only criticism you have against LLM produced text, then there is no problem.

And I'm saying this as somebody who is strongly against LLM-generated content of this form.

	▲	csallen 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I have no problem with AI-generated text. But I do have somewhat of a problem with unedited text. Personally, I even take the time to edit my HN comments. And, for the same reason I'd have a problem watching the same episode of the same show every day, I have a problem with reading text that feels like a super derivative clone of tons of other writing. Which is usually what you get when you don't edit your AI-generated text.