[cadamsdotcom]

> ... I feel contempt for the author, because if you use AI to write, you are a waste of biomass. Let’s not mince words here. Someone who is so eager to replace themselves, that they would have a machine write in their stead, when the machine can’t even write good yet: what do you call that, if not contemptible? It’s like making yourself into a eunuch so Claude can fuck your wife.

Unfortunately due to how tasteless this passage was, I won’t be reading this or your future writing.

[NateEag]

I agree that it was a rude, tasteless metaphor.

Alas, for rude, tasteless behavior, such as replacing your own authentic self-expression with the mellifluous spew of verbal diarrhea that bullshit machines slather across all surfaces they touch, rude, tasteless metaphors are the only fitting ones.

[altcognito]

If only everyones authentic self-expression were so important to hear, to say nothing of unique and inciteful.

I'm not against authentic self-expression, but this is more about being wrapped up in ones own self-importance.

[drdaeman]

Tastelessness aside, it also shows that author doesn’t (or refuses to) understand why someone may decide to delegate a documentation task to a subpar agent.

Laziness.

Yes, conceptually it’s something about surrendering one’s voice and agency to a subpar machine. Or something like that. (Though that persistence-suggestive neutering metaphor is probably a unwarranted exaggeration.) In practice though it’s more like “I don’t want to write anything, but some poorly written document I’ll just proofread to be not too blatantly wrong beats having absolutely nothing. PRs welcome.”

It might be not the best decision, sure. Quite arguably, a wrong one. Still, I find it concerning that it’s sufficient for the author to dehumanize someone, even in a jest of edginess. Like wtf dude chill down, as if the world isn’t mad enough already.

[zetalyrae]

But the problem is people are not just delegating formulaic procedural prose to AI. They're using AI to write entire scientific papers, so now reviewers have to use Pangram[0] to screen submissions. Literary magazines have the same problem[1]. Maybe those people should know that their behaviour is bad.

[0]: https://blog.neurips.cc/2026/06/02/ai-generated-papers-in-th...

[1]: https://neil-clarke.com/a-concerning-trend/

[drdaeman]

Ah, yes, although that’s a different situation from the linked post, more disrespectful (and potentially nefarious) than a sloppy readme. In those cases, most likely, more than just laziness is involved.

[fwlr]

Arguably, someone who has chosen to replace their own human expression with machine words has already dehumanized themselves - although this is perhaps a too-literal reading the word “dehumanized”?