alt Hacker NewsThe author says in the introduction that a certain amount of the book is verified. Presence of LLM-use doesn’t inherently make something of less value.
Replies
OBVIOUS presence of LLM-use devalues something to the point that you have to wonder why a human is in the loop at all
Using AI to go through an old manuscript has nothing to do with writing up those same results with AI. These are completely separate concerns.
The problem with AI generated content is, it tells me you didn't care enough about the work to do it yourself. To understand it fully, to the point where you don't need or even want to hand the work off to an LLM.
Interacting with AI content makes me feel like I'm consuming something that was created purely for engagement farming. Not that human created content wasn't for engagement farming, but noticing an AI tell breaks the suspension of disbelief in a way. It devalues the relationship between creator and consumer, so that genuine care is not being shared. It's like I'm a cow being milked on an industrial engagement farm.
Is the author qualified to verify this book?
[dead]
In ways it does though. There are telltale signs of AI writing that once you see it across sites repeatedly, it starts to be annoying to find.
Couple of immediate examples:
- The Codex has 154 pages. 127 of them have been reviewed, 27 not yet. - Each of the 154 pages gets a page of its own.
If an author doesn’t have time to write. Why should I give up my time to read?