Hacker News Reader

I do not know how accurate that is. Assuming it is true, I think it's a similar phenomenon that happens with CGI.

Tell people it's CGI, they won't be enthusiastic about it. But tell them it's "practical effects" and they will absolutely love it. Even when the movie has even more CGI than average... they will still praise it, and will even praise the CGI scenes they failed to identify as computer generated.

View on HN

I can't claim to be able to detect LLM writing with 100% accuracy, but when I do notice it, it's very off-putting. Some claim that's because it's bad writing and that I would be fine with a higher-quality generated text, but that isn't true. I dislike LLM writing purely because it's generated by a machine, not because it's bad (though the bad quality does make it more jarring). In my opinion, handing other people something that a machine generated for you and asking them to read it is extremely disrespectful. I want to read what the human wrote, imperfections and all, because humans have intrinsic value that makes their work matter to me. The product of a machine, on the other hand, is just a facsimile trying to appear like a human made it, and that holds no interest at all to me no matter how good the content would be were it man made.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com