[bobsoap]

This looks like a nice project, but you lose a lot of credibility by having ChatGPT write your comment.

This kind of post instantly repels any desire to seriously interact with you in any meaningful way (at least in me). If English is not your first language, I'd simply say so and then run your own text through deepl.com or something if you think you have to. If your grammar is lacking, use whatever tool for that on your own writing.

Throwing up generic drivel with triple repetition of key facts that sounds like a madlib question straight out of an online marketing crash course is disrespectful to the reader and detrimental to your credibility.

I'm speaking only for myself, of course, and others may disagree. Sorry if this is off-topic.

[hmontazeri]

Thanks for the reply. You're right, it is written with ChatGPT as you already mentioned ENG isn't my first language. Basically just lazy TBH.

[tnzk]

You mean the parent is written by ChatGPT? How did you know that? I'm an ESL speaker and feel nothing wrong with the parent (beside being a bit too dense). Curious how natives or more fluent speakers would feel out of it.

[rjh29]

There's a complete lack of slang, the sentences are verbose, generally use more difficult and formal words (ChatGPT would say 'vocabulary' here), and the final "Overall," reads like a student essay rather than a comment. I agree with other posters about the information/word density being low.

[rs999gti]

> This looks like a nice project, but you lose a lot of credibility by having ChatGPT write your comment.

> There's a complete lack of slang

You're like a modern day Blade Runner,

"Holden : The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can't. Not without your help. But you're not helping.

Leon : [angry at the suggestion] What do you mean, I'm not helping?"

[aaronbrethorst]

Leon: [angry] as an AI language model…

[marc]

When you use ChatGPT a lot you start to recognize certain patterns.

In this case, there’s 3 paragraphs of text, but there isn’t 3 paragraphs worth of information.

So what likely happened is that the OP provided limited context to the AI and asked it to write a 3-paragraph post based on it which it happily obliged to.

It feels like GPT-3.5. I think GPT-4 generally does a better job at these types of texts.

[hackernewds]

Now that you said it, I also recognize the pattern. But in a post-chatGPT world is there any solid source of truth that it was - what if OP denies it (which could realistically be true)?

[marc]

Ultimately I don't think it matters whether it was written by ChatGPT or not.

If it conveys the message the OP is trying to communicate in a readable way, that's all that matters.

I think the reason the person above me pointed out it seemed like ChatGPT (as did I), is to inform the OP that it's quite transparent and they shouldn't just take whatever ChatGPT spits out.

Of course it's possible that we're wrong and it was manually written. In that case it's useful to realize we live in a post-ChatGPT world and if something _looks_ AI-generated, that by itself is (unfortunately?) a bad attribute now.

[Brajeshwar]

I think a scanner will pop this up as ChatGPT-ed. Recently, I thought I will write along-side ChatGPT -- edit it to my tone, correct the styles to my liking, and the like. Unfortunately, I read after finishing up a few article I co-wrote with ChatGPT and I felt like puking all over.

So, I stopped. I will still take inspiration but it feels really fake. Co-incidentally, after looking at most MidJourney pictures, I'm thinking of getting back to my hobby of photography.

[_fat_santa]

For me the tell was this sentence:

> As I developed the tool, I found myself constantly frustrated with the bloated and cluttered nature of the original TechCrunch site, and I knew that others in the tech community would benefit from a streamlined version that focused solely on the content.

ChatGPT responses tend to have this "loop back" where they refer back to the original point (Techcrunch is bloated) multiple times. If he just mentioned he was overwhelmed by the UI, why would he mention it _again_ when talking about developing the app?