How refreshing to read the thoughts of a human in a blog post instead of the garbage that LLMs produce. As the writer says about some of their proofs, the problem is not one of style or em-dashes, but something deeper about the writing that comes out of LLMs:

The problem is it doesn’t make any goddamned sense.

I'd probably insert a 'sometimes' in there, because many times in small doses it does make sense, it's only when you ask for long form writing/work that it becomes apparent there is no coordinating intelligence there.

Interesting just how much of this advice applies to programming as well as to maths:

--

Skills, agent.md and harnesses are probably a dead-end that will die off as the tools become more capable.

LLMs are not good at reducing complexity, however they're very good at adding it, and sometimes it is just unnecessary and he can find ways to cut it by interrogating the LLM.

Some people are responding to the new reality by gleefully using AI to generate lots of semi-OK-ish papers and puking them up on arXiv [this is like people producing mediocre one-shot clones of software].

On the other hand—with creative writing, my advice is not to use AI to write, at all. Ask questions if you want, but write every damned word yourself.

--

Definitely worth a read for the programmers here too.