Comment by pkilgore
9 hours ago
I was always taught: Read good books, that's how you'll write.
I don't even really care AI or human if its written like this. I would rather do anything else than continue reading.
9 hours ago
I was always taught: Read good books, that's how you'll write.
I don't even really care AI or human if its written like this. I would rather do anything else than continue reading.
Yeah. I read the first 5 paragraphs, and that's as far as I could get.
"At least nine issues tell the same story"
"every change lands in both at once"
It's Claudlish, so of course a community full of people who spend lots of time talking to Claude would notice this.
Hard to disagree. I'm interested, but... the writing sucks.
And there's no excuse now anyway the latest Opus/Astra models are actually tolerable. Use those if you must.
The point of the writing is thinking what you are about to say from difference perspectives. Now, everything gets average and boring if LLMs are getting used all the time. And they still waste so many words that don't benefit reader in any way.
I'm thinking it might be ESL and/or translated, but I could be wrong. There are posts from 2022, but they seem a lot more terse.
Not being able to effectively proofread will make slop even sloppier.
I did my best with the writing, but it clearly didn't land for the two of you. Could you point to one thing, or one pattern, that bothered you most? That would help me improve it.
Did you do your best? I think you can do better.
[edited out snipes]
2 replies →
[flagged]
What do you think is bad about the writing? It seems fine to me. What do you mean by "written like this"? What is this?
It's written like one of those long form magazine articles. Which is fine for that kind of thing but maybe not great for software release notes. It goes buildup buildup buildup ... underwhelming payoff.
The disclaimer at the end of the article says AI was used to "polish" the writing. I would guess it's this polish that can be a little off-putting: It reads like a magazine article written by and for people who aren't particularly interested in the topic.
[flagged]
My lacklustre writing skills aside, that garbage needs to be called what it is.
It is either satire designed to grab engagement by shocking people, or the genuine anti-AI frustration of a mediocre writer who has realised they've lost their edge, because their work isn't worth paying for over AI.
The people winning literary awards will keep winning them with their manual writing, and they will keep making good money ghostwriting.
But my article, which is meant to communicate some software features in decent, readable prose, isn't worth $10k of ghostwriting. AI will have to do. So you go get, sir, and please stop gatekeeping! (Not you specifically, you get my drift.)
The Economist recently published a piece on this very subject, too, and I found it a good listen: https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2026/09/07/this-arti...
3 replies →
That was a good read! Bit of a diatribe and don't wholly agree, but I can empathize with the author
Were you not also taught to "say something nice or nothing at all?"
There's no reason to be this nasty. If you don't like the writing, skip the post.
For what it's worth, the writing is clear and it gets the point across.
OP, thank you for doing the work and for sharing it.
How is he being nasty?
I can bet author didn't even read his own AI generated text.... I don't have any issue with AI, but it would be nice if people spend time over creating quality stuff.
You don't see how it's nasty, and then you pile your own nastiness on top.
Get a life and read something you want to read instead of spilling your bile on somebody sharing their work.
1 reply →
Sorry to disappoint, but I did. Multiple times, across multiple days.