Writing articles by hand isn’t just smart— it’s important. No shortcuts. No filler. No excuses.
replyKey insight: relying on AI for writing assistance helps neither the author nor the audience.
> Writing articles by hand isn’t just smart— it’s important. No shortcuts. No filler. No excuses.
replyYou're absolutely right! Would you like to delve into more issues like this one?
It was incredibly refreshing to read an honest story, warts and all, written by a human. And equally infuriating to read a comment about it written by AI.
replyI had assumed the comment you’re responding to is tongue in cheek but it’s honestly hard to tell sometimes.
replyIt is, it’s designed to invoke rage over ChatGPT speak as an example of how awful it is to read.
replyIronically saying "isn’t just smart— it’s important" (complete with em-dash!) and "No shortcuts. No filler. No excuses." sounds very AI-generated.
replyNot saying it is, just pointing out how messed up the world we live in now is.
But... was it?
i have a feeling that the fp was being sarcastic / satirical.
replyNow it all comes together. Want the wrap-up?
replyThat’s the unlock.
replythat's the joke
replyAw, poops. It got flagged :-(
replyEven LLMs have better sense of humor than HN readers.
I laughed
replyMany HNers have their sense of humor removed, when they get their first colonoscopy.
replyI still crack jokes, anyway. Get the occasional downvote, but life’s too short…
That's a really great point, and shows a deep understanding of how consistently humorless HN users are! If you want, I can show several more examples of people knee-jerk downvoting things that are actually pretty funny.
replyThere's always been a general pushback on HN against turning threads into a series of quippy oneliners. It tends toward having a serious discussion about a topic, rather than farming low-effort humour for upvotes. I consider this a good thing, as there are plenty of other places where that is rewarded.
replyYeah it seems harmless in isolation, but I'm pretty sure that lacking a norm against it it is one of the ways you end up with Reddit. And because HN doesn't have an actual anti-humour rule, in the best case it lets the funnier and more creative stuff through while punishing the obvious one-liners and boilerplate jokes that everyone would be clamouring to make first on a Reddit thread. (I don't want to be rude, but the thing where someone writes stereotypical AI speak in an ironic context has been done a billion times and doesn't need to be done again, unless it comes with an interesting twist or unusually sharp execution.)
replyI agree though from my experience on HN people tend to upvote these funny quips instead of abstaining. Yet generally when I write something meaningful I get meaningful replies in return sans upvotes and I treasure those much more.
replyI still cling on to the quaint idea that "upvote" means "adds meaningfully and coherently to the discussion", while "downvote" means the opposite. So not "I agree with this" or "that made me chuckle" but rather "this enhances the conversation" - and especially if it's a well written argument I disagree with because that might make me learn or rethink my position. Humour in a well argued point is very welcome, of course.
replyWish and reality aren't in alignment here but some places like HN or /r/AskHistorians are my refuges.
And honestly, you're brave to point that out.
replyIt reads as clear ironic AI speak.
reply"You're absolutely right for pushing back on that!"
replyI want a "You're absolutely right to be upset!" printed on a shirt.
replyYou're absolutely right to be upset by this t-shirt!
replyBut, allow me to complete the sandwich.
reply