This reads to me like someone's mania project. I wish OP the best and hope they can get some rest.
reply> Your audience, or whoever you aim your work at, should be treated with respect.
replyI just want to amplify this point. As I was reading this, the LLMisms kept jumping out at me and each one felt like the author looking at me and deciding that my time spent reading this prose wasn't actually worth anything to them.
OP: I want YOUR thoughts, not the next token predictions of a gigantic pile of matrix multiplications. I want your awkward sentences, grammar mistakes, half-baked thoughts, self-doubt, silly jokes. I don't want this pile of grandiose mechanical slop completely devoid of humanity.
Personally I don't want to read the codebase AND book of someone 3 weeks into a mania focused on a subject it is unclear they have any prior experience with. Its disrespectful for someone to think they can produce something worthy of consuming another human's time under those constraints.
replyI have to second this. I find the AI written documentation extremely loathsome, hard to read, and somehow both pretentious and lazy.
replyPlease, I beg everyone, stop posting AI slop.
Regrettably, the beatings are going to continue until morale improves.
replyThis isn’t about whether the writer uses LLM or not at all, nor is it about respect. The core novelty it tries to introduce is not hard to understand (even if it is not really that novel). If you don’t want to spend time thinking about what interesting idea it is exploring, that is fine, but pretending or insinuating that it is a LLM problem is just lazy.
replyExplain away then my friend: surely your clear explanation will benefit many other readers who came away with similar confusion?
replyWhat is the core novelty?
reply