The author says in the introduction that a certain amount of the book is verified. Presence of LLM-use doesn’t inherently make something of less value.

▲

gradus_ad an hour ago | parent | next [-]

The problem with AI generated content is, it tells me you didn't care enough about the work to do it yourself. To understand it fully, to the point where you don't need or even want to hand the work off to an LLM.

Interacting with AI content makes me feel like I'm consuming something that was created purely for engagement farming. Not that human created content wasn't for engagement farming, but noticing an AI tell breaks the suspension of disbelief in a way. It devalues the relationship between creator and consumer, so that genuine care is not being shared. It's like I'm a cow being milked on an industrial engagement farm.

▲

scrollop 6 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

1 point by scrollop 0 minutes ago | parent | next | edit | delete [–]

"The problem with AI generated content is, it tells me you didn't care enough about the work to do it yourself."

It may be the translation, however, this project is a passion for him. I would guess the passion is the book itself, and though he wants to share his passion, I imagine creating the actual page for others is tedious compared to the work of discovering the book. I have had the same issue.

If an AI can save you time so you can continue with your passion, I say go for it. No one has paid you to create the page, he's not vying for an award. If people are interested they can read it.

There are likely many people out there doing remarkable work but they can't be bothered creating a website to share with others.

If AI can do that, fantastic - even though some people will moan. There are always people who complain.

▲

doug_durham 15 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Wow. This is the exact opposite of what that the site is. It is very clear that the author of the web site cares deeply about the material and has put a lot of effort into the work. You are letting your personal biases color your view. That is your right, but check to see if it is making you happy.

	▲	jacquesm 9 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Note that (1) this is just your opinion and (2) that he has put a lot less effort into it than others have put into similar endeavors which as a result have a different level of authenticity. > You are letting your personal biases color your view. That is your right, but check to see if it is making you happy. Why the free psycho analysis? GP just made a statement.

▲

esseph an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> It's like I'm a cow being milked on an industrial engagement farm.

Always were, just now this signal makes people aware of it and they don't like how it makes them feel.

▲

yababa_y an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Do you often experience persecutory delusions in front of screens?

Immense amount of human care goes into projects that use AI, and usually the human care goes into the aspects that matter most. AI helps pull projects like this from years into the future, into the present. Time travel leaves some scorch marks, sure. More effort will get attracted into the effort, or the idea will finish its expression and the host organism will move onwards.

	▲	boredatoms 15 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Any amount of slop makes the whole thing feel fake
	▲	QuantumNomad_ an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		There’s nothing delusional about what he said. AI is being used for the most part to shit out as much “content” as possible in order to show ads, sell courses and other products (bonus points if what is sold is itself also pure AI slop), or to finish tasks at work with as little effort as can be done, so that boss man is impressed by the velocity. “Who cares about quality? This is 2026, bro.” The actual thoughtful use of AI is the minority case. Not the default. We humans are lazy, and when we can get away with less effort we put as little effort as we can into things.

▲

wise_young_man an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

In ways it does though. There are telltale signs of AI writing that once you see it across sites repeatedly, it starts to be annoying to find.

Couple of immediate examples:

- The Codex has 154 pages. 127 of them have been reviewed, 27 not yet. - Each of the 154 pages gets a page of its own.

If an author doesn’t have time to write. Why should I give up my time to read?

▲

scrollop 10 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Maybe he is translating to English. Maybe he is translating himself and this is an artifact of German.

"If an author doesn’t have time to write. Why should I give up my time to read?"

Perhaps he is taking the time to translate it for you, otherwise you'd have to do it yourself.

▲

tropicalhunter an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Can you point to any of those in the linked text?

	▲	boredatoms 14 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Our job isnt to review the work of LLMs for free
	▲	jacquesm 8 minutes ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		It's all over.
	▲	10 minutes ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	iamacyborg an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		From the first tool page. Clearly LLM slop. > Löffelholz does not open his book with a showpiece. He opens it with a practical tool you can adjust: choose a size, clamp it, work.

▲

lionkor an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

OBVIOUS presence of LLM-use devalues something to the point that you have to wonder why a human is in the loop at all

▲

Gabriel54 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Using AI to go through an old manuscript has nothing to do with writing up those same results with AI. These are completely separate concerns.

▲

lelandfe an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Is the author qualified to verify this book?

▲

an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

nullsanity 25 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]