undefined

points

[-]

Your reaction is worse than the article. There's no way you could know for sure what their writing process was, but that doesn't stop you from making overconfident claims.

by theredbeard3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I’m sorry but no attempt was made here. It contains all the red flags in the first few paragraphs.

by yomismoaqui4 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Sorry but seems like most people don't care or even like AI writing more:

https://x.com/kevinroose/status/2031397522590282212

by toraway3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

That's the problem with AI writing in a nutshell. In a blind, relatively short comparison (similarly used for RLHF), AI writing has a florid, punchy quality that intuitively feels like high quality writing.

But then after you read the exact same structure a dozen times a day on the web, it becomes like nails on the chalkboard. It's a combination of "too much of a good thing" with little variation throughout a long piece of prose, and basic pattern recognition of AI output from a model coalescing to a consistent style that can be spotted as if 1-3 human ghost writers wrote 1/4 of the content on the web.

by beepbooptheory2 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

One thing I've learned recently is a lot guys (like here) have been out here reading each word of a given company's tech blog, closely parsing each sentence construction.. I really cant imagine being even concious of the prose for something like this. A corporate blog, to me, has some base level of banality to it. It's like reading a cereal box and getting angry at the lack of nuance.

Like who cares? Is there really some nostalgia for a time before this? When reading some press release from a cybersecurity company was akin to Joyce or Nabakov or whatever? (Maybe Hemingway...)

We really gotta be picking our battles here imo, and this doesn't feel like a high priority target. Let companies be the weird inhuman things that they are.

Read a novel! They are great, I promise. Then when you read other stuff, maybe you won't feel so angry?