[stingraycharles]

You do you, but the least you can do is either not reply, or admit that you used AI to write the copy as well.

[vedmed]

I'm not a data analyst. Almost everything pertaining to data analysis of the log is perplexity labs.

I'm also not a journalist and the article I wrote didn't sound professional and was too long. So I had AI change it to have a professional tone and structure and then edited it.

I'm also not an artist and I had AI generate a picture of a bear reading a newspaper. Then I used krita to remove the background and make it transparent.

I also asked the AI to generate 10 headlines, it gave me this one:

How a monopoly ISP weaponizes support incompetence against technical customers

    Calls out systemic issue, appeals to HN's anti-monopoly sentiment

Then I changed it to:

How a monopoly ISP refuses to fix upstream infrastructure

Yes I leveraged expertise from three fields outside of my skillset to simplify a task, bounce back ideas, and conclude with a superior end result. It was demonstrably effective and it would have been stupid to spend 4x the effort to receive zero traction.

[bityard]

If you are not a journalist, and AI is your editor, then you should remove the statement on your site that calls itself a newspaper. Newspapers have journalists and editors.

What you have, sir, is a blog.

[vedmed]

make me.

[mh-]

I just want to apologize if my amusement about the Gemini comment below the article played some part in kicking off this absurd off-topic witch hunt.

I don't see anything wrong with using AI in the way you did.

[teiferer]

Thanks for owning up.

Though you did your original message a disservice. Now we are left wondering how forthcoming, honest and friendly you were with that support staff. I'd also try to cheap out if I'd have to deal with a rude and/or dishonest customer. I'm not saying you were, but it's hard for us to know if you throw things at us like "why should I care?" You need to understand that this causes certain reactions.