Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Why do you care, if a human reviewed and edited it, someone filtered it to make sure it’s correct. It’s validated to be correct, that is the main point.


> if a human reviewed and edited it, someone filtered it to make sure it’s correct

Yes.

But it's not “free from AI-generated prose”, so why advertise it as such?

And since the first sentence is a lie, why should we believe the second sentence at all?


Clearly someone didn't make sure everything is correct, since they allowed a self-contradictory statement (whether generated by AI or by human) into the text...


Because it never works like that in practice.

People have the illusion of reviewing and "owning" the final product, but that is not how it looks like from the outside. The quality, the prose style, the errors that pass through due to inevitable AI-induced complacency ALWAYS EVENTUALLY show. If people got out of the AI bubbles they would see it too, alas.

We keep reading the same stories for at least a couple of years now. There is no novelty anymore. The core issues and problems have stayed the same since gpt3.5. And because they are so omnipresent in the internet, we have grown to be able to recognise them almost automatically. It is no longer just a matter of quality, it is an insult to the readers when an author pretends that content is not AI generated just because they "reviewed it". Reviewing sth that somebody else wrote is not ownership, esp when that sth is an LLM.

In any case, I do not care if people want to read or write AI generated books, just don't lie about it being AI generated.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: