[arkadiytehgraet]

Here, just a few examples over the last 9 days, in no particular order of exaggeration magnitude:

Unsubstantiated claims of 3x-10x productivity at allegedly a FAANG: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48174666

More claims of the same, still unsubstantiated: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48173995

Even more claims of the same, still nothing of substance: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48173975

Outlandish claim of using 300$ in tokens in 1 hour at allegedly a FAANG: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48158438

Ostensibly great things with unlimited tokens at allegedly a FAANG: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48269185

Complaints about HN "not getting" AI: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48245673

An attempt to validate vibe-coding in production: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48243651

Whitewashing Claude degradation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48211638

More Claude degradation whitewashing: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48245784

Whitewashing Anthropic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48199951

Promises of coming AI revolution: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48188104

All of this serves to hype up the LLM technology with absolutely outlandish claims, while also propping up Anthropic online.

[solenoid0937]

This is so cool, I have my own fan on HN that cherry picks my comment history to call me a shill!

[arkadiytehgraet]

You could have easily disproved my claim by linking your comments with a more balanced or nuanced opinions on the matter, except you cannot, because there is only even more outlandish and wild stuff you say about AI and LLMs.

[dgellow]

It‘s perfectly ok to share opinions that aren’t nuanced or balanced. You seem to have something strongly against that specific user, the fact that you felt the need to go through so much of their history, post a massive list of their „suspicious“ comments, and mention in multiple places how they are a shill is pretty concerning imho and doesn’t make you look good at all. Their activity looks fine, they seem to be enthusiastic and optimistic about the technology, but that’s pretty much it.

And now you’re asking them to somehow disprove they aren’t a shill? How would that even work. You seem unnecessarily antagonistic towards that user

[arkadiytehgraet]

It is not just me who finds solenoid0937 account suspicious: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48173975

I did not have to go through "so much of their history", this is just the last 9 days. There are considerably wilder claims from them earlier, when the account was solely focused on propping up LLM-hype and defending Anthropic.

We are living through a period of time with one of the potentially most disruptive technologies ever being developed. A lot (A LOT) of money is invested into it, a lot of livelihoods are and might be affected by it, and some people stand to gain A LOT from it. So there are significant interests to sway public opinion in favour of LLMs and AI, to hype it up to unreasonable extent, to muddle the waters of a reasonable discourse. Accounts such as solenoid0937 are unleashed on public forums to achieve that, and because of that we have to take everything they write with a huge grain of salt, or even ignore completely, as there is just no true information in their comments.

You yourself got baited by them by considering what they wrote seriously regarding "amazing things with unlimited tokens". Now the idea that "LLMs 1) are used in one of FAANGs massively and 2) are used to produce amazing things" is planted. Will you remember later that they did not actually provide any evidence of that? The account has been doing this trick multiple times over the last few weeks.

For me, as someone who is actually using LLMs in their work, a single balanced comment on the matter would have been more than enough to consider them not being a shill. Unfortunately, instead they have claimed recently that they went completely full-on with agentic coding (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48245721) skipping reviews and pushing to prod directly (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48243651) at a FAANG, no less. And they claimed it in such a manner that this is objectively the only proper way to do the work, and all other approaches are doomed. How is this anything else than peddling unfounded LLM-hype, I do not know.

The example above might seem like a singular episode, but they have been doing it over and over for the last year and a half, so this is now a pattern. No actual evidence for any of their claims is provided, so the only thing left is AI-hype, and pretty wild at that. So why would a reasonable person, with ostensibly enough money to retire (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48252297), ostensibly working at a FAANG, spend all their days spreading unfounded AI-hype in a degrading manner on HN and defending Anthropic? Given the vested financial interest in the technology, the most plausible answer here is that they are paid to do so.

[solenoid0937]

Every time I've tried to engage you in debate you just call me a shill so there's no point. Love ya too though!

[arkadiytehgraet]

I have explicitly stated more than once, beforehand, what would have given you a benefit of doubt from my perspective. Even after reading all that you opted for answer evasion, rather than providing any substance, as you do with all the questions addressed to you. I do understand why you had to do it here though, because the claims regarding AI and LLM you have made before are even more outlandish than what has been posted over the last 10 days and similarly without a single shred of proof.

[solenoid0937]

I find it so funny that claims like this are so outlandish to you that it makes you think I'm a shill:

> Unfortunately, instead they have claimed recently that they went completely full-on with agentic coding skipping reviews and pushing to prod directly at a FAANG, no less.

This is like the most normal thing in my org, lmao. The fact that this aggravates you so much, is proof to me that many people/industries are way behind the curve on agents. Still bullish!

> as someone who is actually using LLMs in their work,

You should consider that your way of using LLMs is not the only correct way, and may in fact be severely limited, unimaginative, and/or close-minded.

[arkadiytehgraet]

Nothing of substance yet again, more unfounded LLM-hype. As a reminder, this whole thread started by other people asking you to provide examples or proofs of your outlandish claims. Instead of doing that you ignore the questions or cover behind NDA (which is bullshit, because 1) no one is asking about the secret sauce, only the end result and 2) most of the work in FAANGs does not require signing NDA, and you would have known it if you actually worked at a FAANG).

Moreover, you refuse to even name the organization you allegedly work at. This is because people who actually work there will immediately call you out on your bullshit, so you have to stay intentionally vague there.

This is just yet another evidence of you being a shill.

[kbelder]

He may not be a shill, he may just be terribly and enthusiastically wrong. Lots of HN posters are.