alt Hacker News> and it's clear all of their replies are human-written. The AI use is stated up front in the readme. The
Very much not the case with the comment I responded to.
There is a stark contrast between the AI written first comment and some of their other comments.
I know many here don’t like any accusations of AI writing because they aren’t as attuned to picking it up, but the comment I responded to was as blatant as it gets.
I tried to give a more friendly encouragement to share self-written comments.
Yes, I'm obviously aware of that. We're all capable of seeing em dashes and staccato sentences. My reply mentions, explicitly, that their top-level comment was AI written (reusing portions of their AI-written readme) and that their replies are human written. I chose my words carefully; HN itself uses the terminology "comment" for top-level messages and "reply" for sub-level messages, and I used the phrase "top-level" to further disambiguate it. I apologize if that was confusing but what I said was accurate and carefully considered. I further agreed that they should not have done that. That one comment seems to be their only crime here. You then took the opportunity to soapbox about a bunch of things that OP did not do, in the message that I replied to.
I don't have anything to add. It just seems like you misunderstood my message.