I agree that this triggered my AI writing senses. Points in favor:

- "It’s not an accident — it’s driven by the same physics." The classic "it's not x, it's y", with an em-dash thrown in for good measure

- "Typhon brings these into the component storage model — not as bolted-on workarounds, but as first-class citizens." More "not x, but y", this time with a leading clause joined by an emdash

- "Blittable, unmanaged, fixed-size, stored contiguously per type — that’s the ECS side." Short, punchy list of examples, emdash'd to a stinger, again typical of LLM writing

- "Schema in code, not SQL. Components are C# structs with attributes, not DDL statements. Natural for game developers, unfamiliar territory for database administrators. If your team thinks in SQL, this is a paradigm shift." This whole mini-paragraph is the x/y style, combined with the triplet / rule-of-three, just at the sentence scale. And then of course, the stinger at the end.

Definitive, no, but it certainly has a particular flavor that reads as LLM output to me.

Points against: “Two Fields, One Problem” :)

I occasionally read a geopolitics blog that is one of the top search results on Google. I honestly couldn't do it anymore. Every other subheading was something along the lines of, "The experts are saying about Ukraine--Without the Fluff".

I'm not really seeing it tbh. I mean, maybe they used a chatbot to help them write it but I don't immediately feel like I'm reading padded slop without actual content, it's fairly to the point. I just clicked around on the blog to see if anything else feels like it, but it's mainly just very "prefab". That did teach me that the author apparently also worked on DOTS previously for Unity, so they at least have actual hands-on experience with game engines.

If anything, this confirms it for me. On his about page, there's this:

"Hi there, I am Loïc Baumann, I’m from Paris area, France I develop, since early 90s, first assembly, then C++ and nowadays mostly .net.

My area of interest are 3D programming, low-latency/highly-scalable/performant solutions and many other things."

Compare that style to what's in this most recent blog - mildly ungrammatical constructions typical of an ESL writer, straightforward and plain style vs breathless, feed-optimized "not x, but y", triplet/rule of three constructions, perfect native speaker grammar but an oddly hollow tone. Or look at this post from 2018: https://nockawa.github.io/microservice-or-not-microservice/ It's just radically different (at a concrete syntactic level, no emdashes). I'm sure he has technical chops and it's cool that he worked on DOTS, but I would bet a very large amount of money he wrote the bullet points describing this project and then prompted GPT 5.3 to expand them to a blog post to "save time".

"very, very obvious" and yet so could be your comment or mine. Can we stop this kind of farming comment already?

When the AI-written articles stop, the comments calling it out will stop, too.

Nitpicking: Once articles which are _obviously_ AI-written stop, the comments calling it out will (should) stop.

It is far more likely that AI-written articles will become harder to spot, not that they will stop being written.

vacuous falsity isn't an interesting case to examine

Means, the crying will never stop

> calling it out

Calling what out? Did we suddenly invent a durable Turing test that will last more than six months? (We didn't, but some people "just know")

The only durable metric is if the article is good, if the ideas are good. Everything else is complaining about Bob Dylan's electric guitar.

are you claiming that you can't recognize default style ai writing after a paragraph or two?

Yeah the "more than a paragraph or two" is key here. Indicators of AI writing work both ways; the more text you write, the more likely you are to "slip" and use some phrasing or syntactical constructions uncommon in LLM output. (This is why AI detectors perform worse on shorter excerpts.)

I posted this elsewhere, but convincingly, consistently "writing like AI" and never slipping once takes an amount of knowledge and skill analogous to art forgery. Except that with art forgery you can at least make millions of dollars off it.

"just accept the AI slop, pleb"

> very, very obvious" and yet so could be your comment or mine. Can we stop this kind of farming comment already?

If you want to read chatbot output, why are you coming here? There's a ton of free chatbots for you to read.

After all, the audience here knows where to go to get chatbot output, but they're coming here instead. What does that tell you?

> What does that tell you?

That HN was a neat community fifteen years ago, but like all things cool made by early adopters, it will eventually attract a following hoping to be somewhere, to exist among people doing things, but the tragedy of such followings is that they bring with them their toxicity, their immunity to their own poison, and drown out what they depend on until the early adopters early adopt away.

The real slop is all this lazy concern farming from an ant mill that is powerless to do anything except validate its own hand wringing.

> The real slop is all this lazy concern farming from an ant mill that is powerless to do anything except validate its own hand wringing.

Which circles back to the question of why, if you want to read AI output, are you still here?

You can read that sort of thing just about anywhere else.

Get over it

It's also a bit odd they don't mention column-oriented databases at all.

Yeah that was my second thought. ECS' favoring of structs-of-arrays over traditional arrays-of-structs for game entities boils down to the same motivations and resulting physical layout as column-stores vs row-stores.

Why would column-oriented databases be mentioned? My understanding is that these are typically used for OLAP, but the article seems to talk only about OLTP.

Modern database engines tend to use PAX-style storage layouts, which are column structured, regardless of use case. There is a new type of row-oriented analytic storage layout that would be even better for OLTP but it is not widely known yet so I wouldn't expect to see it mentioned.

Because there is a whole section that describes column based storage without mentioning that some databases have column based storage as an option.

This is one of the main problems I have with LLMs. It finds patterns in words but not content. I see this in code reviews and eventually outages. Something looks reasonable at the micro scale but clearly didn’t understand something important (because they don’t understand) and it causes a major issue.

Every top comment that I've read today is the same shit complaining about AI writing.

At some point this is not positive for the community.

Sorry — this community immune response is the future. Quit posting slop or get left behind.

Are you really sorry?