On the one hand, I get what you mean. Some genuinely interesting projects are immediately dismissed because AI was involved.

On the other hand, I have two real problems with AI writing.

1. LLM prose is genuinely unpleasant to read. Its the exact same way that I strongly dislike reading LinkedIn posts or email marketing copy. It's all the same slimy tone that's using a certain sentence structure and rhetoric to try to be interesting without real substance.

2. Sometimes it feels like someone asking you to read an article with no punctuation or grammar: the author couldn't put in time/effort to make this enjoyable to read, so now I have to spend more time/effort reading it.

Personally, I don't read through all marketing copy to see if "this one is going to be good", nor do I want to spend time providing constructive critical feedback on it.

▲

4 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

embedding-shape 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> LLM prose is genuinely unpleasant to read

What exact parts from the submission are "genuinely unpleasant to read" right now? Highlighting those could make it better rather than just filling HN with "LLM texts is boring to read".

> Sometimes it feels like someone asking you to read an article with no punctuation or grammar

Ok, but is that actually the problem here, or why are you adding more general complaints instead of focusing on the actual submission article?

If you don't like it, don't read it, don't contribute to the discussion, I don't understand this obsession with "must let others know I don't like LLM writing, although I'm not 100% sure this submission actually suffers from the issues I don't like with LLM writing".

	▲	tisdadd an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I mean, I got about half way through before going blah. But it is a fun looking project and it is great that they are pushing for an open platform. I like to read, but some writing is more enjoyable than others. If you want to contribute to their wiki, you can do so.
	▲	blanched an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I mean, you posted a comment and started a discussion about "LLM complaints on HN", so I replied to that. I didn't comment about the article itself. Part of my point is that the line between "written by an LLM" and "written for marketing" is so blurred that you can't always tell anyways.