Writing quality was distracting. Very breathey. Hard to understand if I was getting important information or not -- but it's ok, some people will defend this style.

▲ stabbles 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You can look at a histogram of number of words per sentence, and you'll find immediately that it's written by an AI.

    When?
    Today.
    Minutes.
    Four years.
    $54 million.
    Collect feedback.
    Delivered faster.
    Not days.
    Not weeks.
    It's free.
    ...
    No $19 million in upfront costs.
    They're now doing meaningful work.
    Let me put that in context.
    That's a 95% cost reduction.
    But think about what that represents.
    And we can show you how.

	▲	hallway_monitor 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The only time I want to read something written by AI is when I am interacting with an LLM directly. I don’t know who these people are that think others want to read their slop. Even if the content is good, I can’t stand reading it.
	▲	panny 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		lol, I copied the first 4 paragraphs into gptzero and it confirms, 100% ai generated. Which makes this submission against HN guidelines...

▲ nicbou 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's written like a LinkedIn post, with the TED Talk pauses for effect. I've come to filter out anything written in that style.

▲ pwatsonwailes 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's written by an AI. That's why it's a bit shit.

	▲	vessenes 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I'd put my money on "edited by an AI". Some of it feels info-dense enough to be a person.