It's the writing style of AI. It's quite problematic for a lot of people.
replyI often really want to read articles, but the minute is encounter claude-speak, I (a) either leave (90%+ of the time) or (b) ask another AI to rewrite it using simple english or in a style of another writer in that space (yes, I know, it's ironical).
Just hard to read AI-ism.
The load bearing fact is it's not the content, or the originality, or the perceived lack of effort, it's reading the same trope for the 10000th time, and experiencing something akin to ad-blindness.
The issue isn't with using AI for finding an exploit, it's with using an AI to write up the article for human consumption about it.
reply> it's with using an AI to write up the article for human consumption about it.
replyNothing wrong with it, as soon as it is not obviously AI-generated looking and has good, high quality content.
Seems kind of subjective innit?
replyTaste is subjective of course, but when 80% (or whatever) of your potential audience dislikes something perhaps you should just accept that it's a bad idea.
replyThing is, using ML they can make more than 5 times as many articles. And I suspect those who don't object to wasting more time on an article because it was produced in a protracted way probably clock through on ads more. So annoying 80% of people might still get them more revenue in the end.
replyThat is a fair point - hopefully there won't be any hard feelings when the 80% attempt to censor such slop from their platforms of choice. Taste is subjective and I come to HN for things that taste good. (Notably this leaves the door wide open for AI authored content with a decent tone.)
replyThe writing style was boring I also stopped reading halfway through esp after I read that a similar tablet had already been rooted in the past and documented online using the same exploit the AI successfully used
reply