[deanc]

Serious question, why does it matter to you? Maybe they wrote a draft and reviewed Claude's writing before publishing. Why are we trying to "call out" when AI is assisting us in our work? This is an open source project, not a F500 company. They have limited resources, maybe English isn't their first language.

[zopa]

I'm not a shadcn user, and so as with any project I'm not familiar with, I'm looking to see if if it's interesting to me. If the post is thoughtful and clear and I like the sense I get of their perspective on programming, then great, tell me more. No guarantees but maybe the writer is someone whose software I'd like to use. Claude doesn't tell me anything except that the writer used Claude.

It's the same as with too marketing-speak, which conceivably this is. Maybe the actual work is good but Sturgeon's law, it's probably crud. If I really needed a UI library or whatever right now then maybe I'd dig deeper but in casual browsing HN mode? No time, catch them later.

So maybe all your maybes but who cares? It's not AI that made me think badly of them: I think badly of all software by default and it takes more than Claude to change my mind.

[hamburglar]

For me, I don’t care one bit whether the text is AI generated or not. What stood out to me on this one is that they talked about something called shadcn, something called base UI, and something called radix as if they were things that everyone should be familiar with, but failed to consider that a reader might never have heard of any of them. I read for a while to see if they give some clues but nothing was forthcoming so the whole thing might as well have been gibberish.

[LVB]

Tone/style bit aside, a real problem is length. Scroll waaay down and look at most older updates and see how brief and too-the-point they were. Often they look rushed, some essential links, and that’s it. Fine by me! That’s the real state of things… people usually don’t want to write bc it’s a lot of effort.

I see the same phenomenon at work. A year ago I’d read your two-sentence daily update in slack, all riddled with the quirks and oddities that made it yours. Today when I see the page of headings and emojis describing the couple things you did yesterday, I wince because now I’m the one who has to sift through the fluff to get to the point.

[dev_hugepages]

Because it sounds like the average LinkedIn poster and we don't want it to invade spaces outside LinkedIn.

[purerandomness]

Because it means that they think I'm stupid.

They think it's not worth investing human attention to write it, so why am I expected to invest my attention to read it?

If it's written as SEO spam, why link it here?

If it's written to be read by humans, do they think we're stupid?

[robmccoll]

Because I associate that style with "I have little to say, but I will say it in as many words as I possibly can"

[stefan_]

Just read the post! It's essentially "we switched from Radix to Base UI". Why? "the ecosystem moved on". Nothing says braindead web frontend churn like this post, and them not having written it in the first place is just the cherry on the cake.

They could have just written "we asked Claude to rewrite our project with Base UI because it eclipsed Radix in NPM downloads".

[NamlchakKhandro]

If you're not a heavy frontend developer then you probably don't know why radix is a blocker for most server side react

[IshKebab]

I think fundamentally it's just really annoying to read the same cringey LinkedIn style voice everywhere.

If you manage to write an AI assisted article that doesn't tediously follow the "what this means for you", "it's not this, it's that", "One thing. Two things. Three things." formula... I really doubt people would complain.

[vcf]

I agree that the style is somewhat generic, but for things like new release announcements, I find that the common structure allows me to skim through much faster. I value that and am happy with that tradeoff.

[nextaccountic]

I'd prefer to read the draft

[re-thc]

> This is an open source project, not a F500 company.

Vercel?

[lionkor]

Because it implies that the users of the AI don't understand that it's output is usually horseshit littered with enough good info to make it sound correct