What do you think is bad about the writing? It seems fine to me. What do you mean by "written like this"? What is this?

▲

lmz 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's written like one of those long form magazine articles. Which is fine for that kind of thing but maybe not great for software release notes. It goes buildup buildup buildup ... underwhelming payoff.

▲

ptx 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The disclaimer at the end of the article says AI was used to "polish" the writing. I would guess it's this polish that can be a little off-putting: It reads like a magazine article written by and for people who aren't particularly interested in the topic.

▲

gfody 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

faithraven 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

My lacklustre writing skills aside, that garbage needs to be called what it is.

It is either satire designed to grab engagement by shocking people, or the genuine anti-AI frustration of a mediocre writer who has realised they've lost their edge, because their work isn't worth paying for over AI.

The people winning literary awards will keep winning them with their manual writing, and they will keep making good money ghostwriting.

But my article, which is meant to communicate some software features in decent, readable prose, isn't worth $10k of ghostwriting. AI will have to do. So you go get, sir, and please stop gatekeeping! (Not you specifically, you get my drift.)

The Economist recently published a piece on this very subject, too, and I found it a good listen: https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2026/09/07/this-arti...

	▲	gfody 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> It is either satire designed to grab engagement by shocking people it is satire - it's trying very hard to be obvious about it, yet amusingly still fails to get thru now and then it's an attempt to get inside the head of those people who rush over from one of the various syndicates, pangram verdict in hand, to slam any and all ai writing - usually with pre-cooked burns, uninterested in the actual substance - the ai shout-down brigade
	▲	notJim 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		The unchanged AI style is grating to read. I'd rather read the bullet points you fed to your AI than this style. Of course I'd really rather read your own quirky writing style (which identifies you as a human), but if you don't have the bandwidth for that, just post the prompt.
	▲	cloudfudge 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		In all honesty, I read your whole page and didn't find it one bit distracting or noticeable. I got to the end and saw the disclaimer about the AI writing and thought, "well, at least that'll head off the inevitable bitching about it being AI writing." Then I came to HN and saw people acting like you were committing atrocities. Sigh.

▲

exographicskip 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That was a good read! Bit of a diatribe and don't wholly agree, but I can empathize with the author