7 ms·
An AI written post talking about the importance of human connection in the age of AI is hilarious.
by mdorazio 3mo ago
An AI written post talking about the importance of human connection in the age of AI is hilarious.
- gblargg 3mo agoSince I couldn't be bothered, I had AI read it and tell me the outcome: they did in fact go to online-only bookings, freeing the staff from the phones so they could help customers more.
- loopmonster 3mo agoEven though they were fully booked from the phone bookings regardless
- LanceJones 3mo agoI always wonder how people can tell. For this particular article, was it the thirty-four occurrences of em dashes with spaces on either side? Something else obvious?
- ramraj07 3mo agoThis particular article has the tell tale opus 4.8 smell of these short sentences. I think its mainly opus 4.8
- smallerize 3mo agoThe tiny sentence fragments are too much for me. They trip up the flow of the text. Also the "not this, but that" structure is overused here.
- bitwize 3mo agoArticles of this type suggest a fun game: "LLM or Marketroid?" Because either one could have written it, and both are capable of about equivalent levels of original thought. (whoops did i just say that out loud)
- AnimalMuppet 3mo agoHey, the LLMs had to pick up these patterns from somewhere. Embarrassingly, before LLMs, there were plenty of humans that wrote like this.
- _gmax0 3mo agoWhen did "X is built one marble at a time" become popular? Maybe search analytics can tell us.
- smallerize 3mo agoWell, this isn't what I expected. (And it only goes up to 2022.) https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=one+marble+at+a+time&year_start=1800&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=one+marble+at+...
- clark_dent 3mo agoThis one almost feels like the AI got stuck in a perseverating loop of "He <blank> the <blank>." <repeat> This is followed up by a sprinkling of every possible punctuative shakeup: bold, em-dash, semicolon, colon, quote, etc.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- loopmonster 3mo agoIt was the content. So many very specific claims with no source, just stuff being made up. I don't know who Brené Brown is, perhaps she specifically researches trust, but how curious that her daughter can raise a problem with trust, specifically cite two named behaviours that build trust, and then Brown just happens to have a database of trust-building behaviours to hand, that she hasn't even analysed, ready to output a teachable moment.
- brookst 3mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brené_Brown https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brené_Brown I am not sure if you posted a brilliant, subtle joke... or if you're demonstrating the exact behavior that you suggest is a flag of inauthenticity.
- rustyminnow 3mo agoIn the article, she wasn't introduced as a researcher at all, but suddenly "She went back to her research data...". This totally smells like an LLM refactor where it re-emits surface level details, but completely misses the key beats that tie ideas together across a story.
- brookst 3mo agoSo, failure to do research and ensure a coherent mental model leads to erroneous inferences… for humans as well :)
- rustyminnow 3mo agoWhat's your point? Yes, humans and AIs CAN make similar errors. However, continuity and context churn at this level is the sort of error that humans make rarely and AIs make constantly. By itself it is not a sure sign of LLM output, but along with other signals it is highly suggestive.
- lozenge 3mo agoIt is the em dashes and the excessive wordiness as well as a lot of "not this, but that". Eg: "Not dramatically. Just quietly. " -- This is filler words. Whether it's dramatic or quiet has no relevance to the point they're making. It also loves threes: "Well-modelled, properly sourced, beautifully visualised to requirements" - again, all irrelevant. The point they're making is that it's measuring the wrong thing, not that "beautifully visual things can be incorrect". "There’s a piece of this conversation that most leaders miss, and it’s the part I care about most" - this hook of "most people miss" it is very common in AI writing.
- mpalmer 3mo agoWell, sometimes there's flat-out nonsense that seems to have been written purely to back into the author's thesis: You cannot design an algorithm that eavesdrops on dinner conversation and dispatches someone to buy a street hot dog, because the person on the receiving end would immediately sense the machinery of it. But usually there's also: - Word count hovering between four and five thousand words - Dramatic/narrative section titles - "No X, no Y. Just Z" Last but certainly not least, there's the Lists of Exactly Three Things. I counted literally thirty in this piece. Examples: - "...the ritual of a human voice, the small exchange about an anniversary or a first date, the warmth of being recognised." - "Who was celebrating a birthday? Who was on a first date? What had a regular not finished on their plate six months ago?" - "You can’t purchase it, automate it, or accelerate it with a clever marketing campaign." - "...forgive outages, laugh off a late delivery, stay through a price increase." - "...the food arrives hot, the bill is accurate, the room is clean." - "You notice, you adjust, you respond."
- frostlynx 3mo agoI personally thought to myself "written by AI" after this part: ... the restaurant was fully booked. No warmth. No conversation. Just a long wait and a closed door. In trying to humanise the process, he’d made it worse. I'm sure some people write this way, but most don't. And AI writes this way.
- netsharc 3mo agoNot sure if AI slop, or LI (LinkedIn) slop...
- warpech 3mo ago(As a non-native speaker) I didn’t notice that, I love this post and even shared it with my team
- ashishact 3mo agoI had read 80% of the post and loved it. Then I came to see few comments - Saw yours and now having difficulty reading further. That means: 1. AI has gotten better - or eventually most people would like reading AI generated content 2. Author is just using AI to post-process - content is original Anyway I did love the content.
- ashishact 3mo agoI normally have conversation with opus - And I enjoy it. Maybe I am getting fine-tuned.
- tootubular 3mo agoI have definitely noticed other people using LLM-choice words, myself included, more frequently. It's a strange phenomenon to witness. Obviously the models got them from us first so there must've been some popularity there prior, but the boost is clear. Blast radius, load-bearing, shape, and so on. Or maybe they were always there and my confirmation bias is in high gear.
- Folcon 3mo agoI do have a sneaking suspicion it's a mix of things, I'm at the point now that I do get a bit of an odd feeling whenever I'm reading AI produced content I suspect over time it will get good enough that I'll need a larger sample size to identify it, however that won't solve what I think of as the "why does this need to exist" problem, I've noticed that a fair bit of AI content hits that mark, it can be fun, but I've not experienced that feeling of engaging with something that's been well thought out / executed, maybe we'll hit that point[0], but I suspect it will take a while -[0]: https://xkcd.com/810/ https://xkcd.com/810/
- Flashtoo 3mo agoOne I've started noticing is the "quotation marks around a phrase awkwardly trying to bundle a concept" thing. Like all LLM cliches it's something that has been used in writing for a long time, but I've seen it so much more recently. I think lots of people have picked this up from seeing LLMs use it. But like you said, who knows.
- outlier99 3mo agoYep https://www.pangram.com/history/d3fd8f73-af8a-4cdb-968e-7346b04ded7e?ucc=gcJNTeQdxsV https://www.pangram.com/history/d3fd8f73-af8a-4cdb-968e-7346...
- drob518 3mo agoOops… gotta say that I agree with the general message of the article, though.
- computerphage 3mo agoWhy do you agree?
- drob518 3mo agoBecause I think that a world that is increasingly isolated by technology and divided by ideology is craving authentic personal interaction with real humans. And I think that’s something AI will not be able to duplicate because it requires real human beings.
- kangalioo 3mo agoHow does Pangram detect this? How do we know this is any more reliable than just asking any HN user to judge a text for AI signs, i.e. how is this more authoritative than the comments you're responding to?
- raincole 3mo ago> How do we know this We don't. Pangram is HN's astrology. It has 99.99% accuracy (according to Pangram.)
- computerphage 3mo agoThey claim it has a very low false-positive rate, which is meaningfully more nuanced than "accuracy". "Detect AI-generated content with 99.98% accuracy." -pangram themselves
- holistio 3mo ago> Here’s where I get frustrated, and this is the part of the article I’ve rewritten three times. This was the chaotic evil part.
- shantnutiwari 3mo ago"An AI written post" And the llm witch hunt crowd are here. "I dont like the post so it must be AI." This is getting really tiring. I keep getting downvoted but I will keep pointing out this sucks -- no criticism, no challenging of ideas, just shit post "This is AI" and move on.
- phpnode 3mo agoIt's very clearly written by AI, which means that the thoughts expressed are not novel and the story told cannot be trusted. How can you expect people to spend time digesting the content if the author did not spend time writing it? It would be more honest to show the prompt, or the unpolished draft.