Comment by maplethorpe

Comment by maplethorpe 7 hours ago

18 replies

View on Hacker News

A few sentences in, I was thinking that the article felt AI-generated, so I scrolled to the bottom of the page. There's no author listed, but there is this disclaimer:

"AI assists in refining our editorial process, ensuring that every article is engaging, clear and succinct."

One thing I hope we'll see in the future on these types of articles is the ability to view the original prompt. If your goal is to be succinct, you can't get much more succinct than that.

sarreph 6 hours ago

The (presumably fully human) author is listed in the byline at the top of the article.

What is sadly rather ironic is the author's first name, "Al" looks like AI when stylised in the article's font.

Reply View 6 replies
Waterluvian 6 hours ago

> view the original prompt

I think this assumes a very limited scope of how AI gets used for these. As if the article is a one and done output from a single prompt. I can imagine many iterative prompts combined with some copying and pasting to get an hour’s worth of copy in five minutes.

Reply View 0 replies
autoexec 5 hours ago

> One thing I hope we'll see in the future on these types of articles is the ability to view the original prompt.

Would it matter if the same prompt gives different output? You couldn't verify it.

Reply View 2 replies
  • saghm 4 hours ago

    The point is to not need to look at the output if the prompt itself has all of the info that someone cares about

    Reply View 1 reply
    • baby_souffle 2 hours ago

      If I put a button on the bottom of a web page that says " click here to see the secret sauce", you click it and I pop up some text.

      How likely are you to just trust, let alone know for sure, whether or not the text I showed you is actually what I fed to the llm?

      Reply View 0 replies
jonplackett 6 hours ago

That jovial overly friendly tone is a give away. Like to thinks its writing style is HILARIOUSLY clever

Reply View 1 reply
  • permo-w 5 hours ago

    the reason LLMs use that jovial, overly friendly tone is because it's so common in journalism and marketing. this article does smell of ChatGPT, but there's absolutely no way to know for sure. people using LLMs annoy me just as much as people who are so certain that they can tell the difference

    a smart person can make ChatGPT sounds completely authentic, and a very boring and middle of the road writer who uses em-dashes can make themselves sound completely inauthentic. it's not like LLMs got their style from nowhere

    as far as I'm concerned, as long as the factual information has been curated by a human, I don't give a shit

    Reply View 0 replies
[removed] 2 hours ago
[deleted]
Reply View 0 replies
ortusdux 7 hours ago

Just have an AI summarize it for you /s

https://marketoonist.com/2023/03/ai-written-ai-read.html

Reply View 2 replies
  • elpakal 7 hours ago

    or move the disclaimer to the top. or better yet, have aggregators like HN add a badge if it's likely AI generated

    Reply View 1 reply
    • jedberg 6 hours ago

      > or better yet, have aggregators like HN add a badge if it's likely AI generated

      How could you possibly tell? I've been playing around with AI detectors, putting in known all-human samples, known all-AI samples, and mixed samples.

      The only thing it's gotten right is not marking a human sample as 100% AI (but it marked one of the AI samples as 100% human).

      Having such a mark would be a witch-hunt for sure.

      Reply View 0 replies