Comment by ghomst
5 hours ago
Don't know what you're talking about, the article is good. Yes, they used ai, but this is what ai SHOULD be used for. AI should be used for either very small projects that nobody wants to do or very extreme missions that could take months.
It's the writing style of AI. It's quite problematic for a lot of people.
I often really want to read articles, but the minute is encounter claude-speak, I (a) either leave (90%+ of the time) or (b) ask another AI to rewrite it using simple english or in a style of another writer in that space (yes, I know, it's ironical).
Just hard to read AI-ism.
The load bearing fact is it's not the content, or the originality, or the perceived lack of effort, it's reading the same trope for the 10000th time, and experiencing something akin to ad-blindness.
The issue isn't with using AI for finding an exploit, it's with using an AI to write up the article for human consumption about it.
> it's with using an AI to write up the article for human consumption about it.
Nothing wrong with it, as soon as it is not obviously AI-generated looking and has good, high quality content.
Seems kind of subjective innit?
Taste is subjective of course, but when 80% (or whatever) of your potential audience dislikes something perhaps you should just accept that it's a bad idea.
2 replies →
The writing style was boring I also stopped reading halfway through esp after I read that a similar tablet had already been rooted in the past and documented online using the same exploit the AI successfully used