Hacker News Reader

Comment by kingstnap | Hacker News Reader

GPT-6's design sense is kind of ridiculous imo.

I have explicit instructions to tone it down. Less taglines, eyebrow text, subheadings, decorative spacing, pills, cards.

Hopefully this doesn't bleed into the chat...

View on HN

yes the eyebrow is the tell. I never knew anything about eyebrows in design as I am not a designer. Now they are everywhere. Everything has an eyebrow. It is ridiculous but at least it is an AI smoking gun.

I loved them and I placed them a lot in my designs — if you also include my love for em dashes you can well understand that I feel my own character has become a clanker…

Em dashes got taken from me as a result of Chat. I used them all the time now I can't without it making people pause to think I'm a bot. Still a bit annoyed or sad about that tbh.

I pivoted to using -- or --- instead, shows I'm not a bot and has the same effect.

I had to look this concept up. Seems to me like you could just as easily fit the "eyebrow" words into the main headline with a colon and a bit of ingenuity. But then, that runs the same risk of getting repetitive and AI-tell-ish.

More UI elements == more tokens == more money for OpenAI

It's a pretty clever way to sell more tokens, I have to admit

Except that chat is a fixed monthly fee. More tokens = more cost for them.

Not on enterprise accounts.

Then you should have specified "... On Enterprise accounts" in your comment. But let's be honest, you simply were wrong.

Surely you have better things to do than making comments like this?

Surely you can concede that your statement as written was wrong, that there's no possible charitable understanding where it wasn't, and that at the time of writing the comment you indeed didn't posess the knowledge that it was only for enterprise accounts; otherwise you would have specified it, because then it becomes a completely different claim with different consequences. Unless you misinterpreted it intentionally, in order to derive the implication you wanted, but I'll go with the first interpretation.

My annoyance was about you not acknowledging your wrongness and instead trying to hold on to your statement by shifting the goalpost, and furthermore replying to the commenter that corrected you by correcting *them*.

Furthermore, there seems to be some emotion/bias from your side between the lines of your original comment.

If you think I'm being too harsh, then sorry, but I really dislike this manner of discussing.

Not for enterprise users, they pay per token, even on chatgpt.com.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com