personally, i'm for LLM and AI usage in writing if it helps the writer communicate ideas, their stories, and triumphs in ways they may never have been able to before. I just had one of my posts removed from the front page here which was disheartening because it feels as though what was judged was prose rather than the technical insight in to a niche problem, which seems counterintuitive considering i've always thought of Hacker News being an inclusive place for the technical and engineering skills rather than their level of the english language.

▲

10111001 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> I just had one of my posts removed from the front page here which was disheartening because it feels as though what was judged was prose rather than the technical insight in to a niche problem, which seems counterintuitive considering i've always thought of Hacker News being an inclusive place for the technical and engineering skills rather than their level of the english language.

The problem with LLM voice is that it sends the signal that it's a likely waste of effort to try to figure out if there's any "technical insight" there, because more often than not, there isn't.

Maybe it's not fair that you're paying the price for others using LLMs to abuse their readers, but it's the reality that you have to deal with. It's also not fair to expect readers to wade through all that abusive LLM prose in order to find your (assumed) non-abusive post.

Once LLM writing becomes indistinguishable from human writing, it will be really sad. There will just be a collapse of human engagement, and you might as well just talk to your machine because then at least you know what you're getting and aren't being deceived.

▲

ctrlt 6 hours ago | parent [-]

in some ways I agree, however I think that speaks more about the reader themselves. Just like when communicating with someone who's first language isn't english, I don't disregard the meaning and intent behind their words simply because the way they communicate isn't formally correct. Regarding my post that was removed, it was lovely to see the comments of people that had enjoyed the technical write up. Me personally, i'll always value an attempt at engaging and communicating than none at all.

	▲	acedTrex 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Good lord, someone not being good at english does NOT mean that they put not effort or care into their attempted output. It is RACIST to make that association and thats why its an obvious faux pas. An LLM prose article ABSOLUTELY can mean that. To attempt to conflate the two things is maliciously misleading.

▲

dcss_gardener 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is an interesting corollary to a thing I'm seeing where "devs who thought their job was writing code" are in like existential danger.

Technical skills aren't worth shit and never were, except as far as they enable you to engage with other people in ways you and they find valuable. This used to be really far! It made it easy to believe that the technical skills on their own were what was valuable.

But the engagement was always the valuable thing, generating technical insight was a necessary prerequisite for it. Now anyone with a $20 claude sub can generate technical insight into niche problems, so what's left is everything else. Everything of value.

	▲	10111001 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> This is an interesting corollary to a thing I'm seeing where "devs who thought their job was writing code" are in like existential danger. I think you're misunderstanding that anxiety. I think this is what's going on: 1. For a lot of people, using technical skills like coding is the part of the job they enjoyed. 2. Closely related to the above point: for a lot of people, technical skills was the part they were good at. > Technical skills aren't worth shit and never were, except as far as they enable you to engage with other people in ways you and they find valuable. This used to be really far! It made it easy to believe that the technical skills on their own were what was valuable. > But the engagement was always the valuable thing, generating technical insight was a necessary prerequisite for it. Now anyone with a $20 claude sub can generate technical insight into niche problems, so what's left is everything else. Everything of value. 3. More broadly: if "they" don't find the "technical skills" you provided valuable anymore, why do they need to keep you around? Why not cut your 10-person team down to 3 people (the manager, architect, and technical lead) and fire you and the other 6? Not everyone can re-invent themselves as a product person, even if they had the skills. It's a game of musical chairs.

▲

_spduchamp 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I find a lot of LLM writing exhausting to read. It is like I have to exert extra energy to attenuate my BS detector to cut through what is actually being said, and why.

▲

orphea 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Imagine you cooked something great, a deliciously tender cake or something. I ask you if I can try some, you say sure, cut off a little piece for me, then you drop it and tell I can have it on the floor. That is what AI is doing for writing. Why should I care how the cake would taste, if I don't like eating on the floor?

	▲	ctrlt 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		i don't really agree with that view, but i respect your opinion. In my view, i see it more like someone who's never baked a cake before, offering you a slice, and whether or not it's good may be up to you to decide.

▲

djeastm 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

AI doesn't help the writer communicate ideas. It helps them obfuscate those ideas behind bloated language where even the writer can't discern if it's good or not.

It's the modern equivalent of going to a thesaurus and replacing all your natural words with five-dollar ones.

If you're not confident in your English then just write your brilliant ideas in broken English. Or at most do a direct translation. But don't fluff it with AI's nonsense.

If the ideas are good they will be recognized.

▲

dkn 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Assuming the author had to input good points for the LLM to expand it into a full length post, just give me the points. Give both formats if one must. Translate, spellcheck, fix mistakes with an LLM. Don’t inflate 3 bullet points to a 10 minute read.

I can’t distinguish between well meaning slop and blogspam slop. I might be able to if I’m well informed on the topic and can point out inaccuracies. Otherwise I just don’t know what is accurate and what is filler or outright wrong. LLM-isms are very distracting and exhausting to sort through. It just doesn’t make for a good reading experience.

	▲	hn_acc1 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, this. I mean, if you're writing a novel meant to be read, maybe not. But if you're just trying to communicate 3 ideas, write them out in a way I can quickly tell if it's worth reading more. There are few things (relatively speaking, I mean online activities, etc) more annoying than seeing a click-baity headline, and then having to read 17 paragraphs to actually get to the point that I realize I already knew and understood it, and it's just slop padding.