| ▲ | demibabs 6 hours ago |
| Cool project, but I hate how every new site has this obviously LLM generated copy :(
I feel like most people who use it for their copy don’t realize how obvious it is. |
|
| ▲ | breznev 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Oh it’s not just the site—the app is obviously LLM generated too and feels like it. I gave up and went back to Mos within 20 minutes. |
| |
| ▲ | transitorykris 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | At this point we should be sharing prompts not code for solutions like OpenLogi. Reverse engineering many things can typically be one-shotted (ignoring things like.. capturing a pcap or whatever to aid the effort). Let others add their own taste to the solution. | | |
| ▲ | _345 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Isn't it wasteful to have everyone go off and remake the same software with slightly different bugs in it instead of one that fixes almost all of the bugs | | |
| ▲ | Barbing 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Terribly wasteful, yes, though perhaps if the idea caught on the major labs could stand some chance of long-term profitability. | |
| ▲ | seaal 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Seriously, I wonder how many tokens are generated (wasted) every day on someone recreating another agent memory, context management, code graph, etc. I can’t wait until Qwen 4.5 27B or Gemma 5. |
| |
| ▲ | al_borland 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It then becomes a roll of the dice if someone ends up with working software. | |
| ▲ | dgellow an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Please no, I couldn’t care about your prompts, there is nothing special about them. Anyone can look at the generated artifact and reverse engineer their own prompt in no time |
|
|
|
| ▲ | SubNoize 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Does it matter? People get caught up on LLM this and sure, a professional beats an LLM currently but I'd rather read some well written LLM text over some poorly written human effort |
| |
| ▲ | Gigachad 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If it matters is subjective. But personally I stop reading when I notice it’s AI text because there is never anything in it worth reading. It’s just a prompt expanded in to paragraphs of filler text. This kind of tool doesn’t need a whole Apple style marketing page to sell you on it. It also signals effort to me, when I see vibeslop text I know the project most likely is a one shot weekend project full of issues which won’t be resolved. I’ve seen good examples of AI use in open source, and those projects write the readme and website copy without AI. | |
| ▲ | dgellow an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Your LLM text is obviously not well written if we spot it after 2 seconds. I won’t read it, doesn’t matter how beautiful it is, it’s just pure cringe, I notice, roll my eyes, close the tab. Please give me the poorly written human effort. Is it really that hard to spend 10minutes reading what you produced to see if that feels genuine? | |
| ▲ | demibabs an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It matters to me because I notice and I hate it. I read plenty of not-obviously-AI-generated text and I much prefer doing that, even if it’s not from a professional. It’s not about the quality of the text itself. If Claude was one person with a human level of output, Claude would probably be considered decent at writing. But when I have to read the same genre of slop on 1 million different sites it gets really really annoying imo. | |
| ▲ | Hendrikto 32 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | > I'd rather read some well written LLM text over some poorly written human effort I could not disagree more. |
|
|
| ▲ | ch4s3 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| People realize, but writing good technical prose is hard and a separate skill. |
| |
| ▲ | demibabs 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don’t think it’s that hard; it just takes effort. And the effort is well worth it. | | |
| ▲ | Tallain 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's not that hard if you put in the effort and practice. But if you don't want to and still want to use an LLM, there are low-bar choices you can make (using a technical writing skill, using ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English, choosing your audience, proofreading at the end with human eyes to make sure it makes sense and doesn't repeat itself uselessly). I think it shows either a) low respect or consideration for your audience or yourself, or b) laziness. Trust yourself to write even if it's bad. At least it's human. | |
| ▲ | earth-tattoo 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What is the point of spending so much effort if some people are still going to call it LLM slop? | | |
| |
| ▲ | layer8 19 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Most worthwhile things are hard without a bit of practice. | |
| ▲ | andsoitis 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > writing good technical prose is hard and a separate skill. Hard things are hard. They’re not easy. But they’re worth it. | |
| ▲ | dawnerd 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | There's good technical prose on the site? It's all just fluff marketing that adds nothing. |
|
|
| ▲ | z3n0n 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| it's pretty much "load bearing" at this point. |
