[jaggederest]

Hey friend, try something in this ballpark, your post has a bunch of painful AI tropes:

https://github.com/blader/humanizer

You get a pass here because you're doing really cool stuff but it's kinda tough to read past the AI nonsense, and it's relatively easy to screen out "it's not x it's y" kind of things and the bolded bullet points.

[bonoboTP]

I don't dislike those tropes because they are frequent or because they are not pleasing to read intrinsically. I dislike them because it tells me it was made by AI and AI output varies strongly in quality and most of it is low on insight but rings the right bells to make it seem insightful. It indicates a lack of human care.

Hiding these clues by another AI pass doesn't solve the core problem. Now you just end up with content that camouflaged better but is still equally low in nutritional value.

[Forgeties79]

I dislike them because I find they generally don’t give any useful information OR if the information is in fact useful, it could do it with a fraction of the words.

Vigorous writing is concise.

[kaycey2022]

I dislike it because it feels like I’m doing someone else’s work for them, reviewing what they should have reviewed in the first place.

[cortesoft]

I feel like human copywriters have been using those same tricks for clickbait articles for years…

[squeaky-clean]

"My AI writing isn't slop. It's just as good as buzzfeed lists or celebrity gossip articles."

[dvfjsdhgfv]

Sure, but the omniprevalence of LLMs just just crystallized these into clearly recognizable patterns. Just like cliches, but not being limited to simple phrases.

[nchmy]

Hence I've hated them all since before Ai. But now I'm utterly repulsed by it

[fenix1851]

it’s a different story.

I was highly interested in reading this article from start to finish.

Ofc there are was a lot of slop moments, but author experience itself is great!

And i genuinely don’t care if he would share it through LLM article.

Just please remove slop markers :)

[yellow_postit]

As someone that naturally used a rule of 3 and em dashes I hate AI for taking that away from me.

[jaggederest]

Agreed, I find myself avoiding constructs I would use naturally because they read as AI - "not just because other people would judge them, but because I also notice and dislike them".

[asenna]

Thanks for this! This is exactly what I was looking for.

Tbh, I have a lot of thoughts and ideas and things to share and I do spend time and effort trying to de-AI-ing it but this should help a lot.

I'll try it out.

In fact, I was expecting getting shit on by HN readers for this but was pleasantly surprised that readers moved past it.

[refulgentis]

They haven't: this is the top thread, and the entire threads is saying its unreadable and explaining step by step how to do the basics you should have done before you posted. I'm not sure why you're pleasantly surprised, I would have expected embarrassed, and taken down the HN post to get at least the basics down before sharing it under my name (if possible, dunno how HN submissions work)

[asenna]

Unfortunately will have to disappoint you, can't get embarrassed easily. In fact when all of this worked well locally, felt pretty proud ngl.

[constantius]

It's quite sad that you're feeling pride largely for your ability to write a prompt, and it's sadder that you're being snarky with someone who expects more from HN users.

Your behaviour is not affecting the HN community in a positive way.

[jaggederest]

Yeah I think you'll find these days that there's a lot of respect for substance like what you're doing, even past the noise of the AI. I also use a lot of AI but you really have to demand quality from it, whether it's writing, media, or code. It's clear you've got the taste from your media work, and we're all still learning as we go, so I'm very glad that I could point you in that direction.

[refulgentis]

I'm curious: how, exactly, did it go from this is painful to read due to AI, to no one cares about AI use and you demanded quality when you used it and delivered?

[jaggederest]

It didn't, it went from "this reeks from AI after edits, here's a tool that can help" to "people can read past it but there are better ways, you must demand quality". I don't think those two things are inconsistent.

[refulgentis]

Ah, I see, after he uses the tool it'll be great because he has taste.

[AlecSchueler]

I think you missed an important distinction being made:

> I also use a lot of AI but you really have to demand quality from it, whether it's writing, media, or code. It's clear you've got the taste from your media work, and we're all still learning as we go...

Their use of AI for "media work" has shown a taste but their writing usage still needs to equal that.

[jaggederest]

I don't think "if you iterate on this, try using some tools, and ultimately demand that the output meet or exceed your demonstrated taste in other domains" is a hot take, honestly.

[repparw]

if you care for some feedback about the writing, dropping the link and saying "PR's are open!" would land probably equal or better, and would reduce noise on the message. as sibling said, substance and noise

[asenna]

Agreed.

To be honest, my literal thought process initially when writing was: - I think this is cool, I should probably open source this - No wait, I'm again over planning, no one's gonna read this and the problem is probably too specific to me for anyone to care.

So I just mentioned "lets compare notes if anyone else trying".

Hence you can see from the comment above, I immediately realized I made a mistake when the parent asked for the Skill file. Should've had the link ready. Pleasant surprise.

[jaggederest]

That's actually a really good point, blog posts as open source

[whattheheckheck]

This diminishes the llm performance by making it use random out of band non thinking tokens