The axis running from repulsive to charismatic, the axis running from hollow to richly meaningful, and the axis running from emotional to observable are not parallel to each other. A work of communication can be at any point along each of those three independent scales. You are implying they are all the same thing.

I am a charismatic, extraverted socialite, and if you said this to me in a bar it would earn you an immediate faceful of whatever I had been drinking.

Please, I'm just a self aware nerd.

Not nearly self-aware enough, if you were to go around saying such things to people in person. What a shocking insult, to tell someone their very voice sounds unhuman! I can't say you should never, of course, but I would hope very much you reserve such calumny only for when it has been thoroughly earned.

But of course this is only a website, where there are in any case no drinks of any sort to go flying for any reason, and where such an ill-considered thing to say can receive a more reasoned response like this, instead.

Is this an AI response? Serious question. They’re taking a website comment a bit personally and threatening throwing drinks in peoples faces.

You're worried about me actually throwing a drink - 'threatening?' Really. - and I'm taking things too seriously? This is a website!

It is, though, interesting to me that you see someone behave in a way you aren't expecting and don't quite know how to wrap your head around - no blame; it's a relatively common experience in my vicinity, though normal people typically enjoy it much more than those here - and your immediate recourse is to assume it must have been generated by AI. That's interesting indeed, and I greatly appreciate you sharing it.

The account is from 2016 maybe this is a real person.

But you sound self important and a bit unhinged. It’s not that no one here can wrap their heads around such behaviour. It’s that your comments sounds like a troll response but could also be real.

I didn't say "no one here," though, did I? I said you can't.

> What a shocking insult, to tell someone their very voice sounds unhuman

Are you okay? Would you like to sit down? Do you want some water?

Coming to a forum and pretending that you commit crimes when people insult you is a stereotype of a generic fake internet personality that is incredibly prevalent to the point of being boring.

Was this intentional sarcasm?

So boring you just couldn't help yourself, eh?

But no, I've meant every word I wrote this evening here, just as I do every other word I say or write, ever. Sometimes those words are sarcastic! In such cases there is rarely any doubt.

I doubt you've ever thrown a drink in anyone's face, and I hope I'm right. This kind of thing isn't appropriate for HN.

Oh, good grief. Flag my comment, then. Per the HN guidelines that is the preferable action:

> Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead. If you flag, please don't also comment that you did.

Of course I disagree with "egregious," did it need saying. After an insult like that, I promise you, no one in my bar would consider I had acted egregiously at all. But I admit it is a surprise to see you violate the site's discussion guidelines, in the very effort to enforce them.

> After an insult like that

Did I miss something?

> "real" AI being much more like a charismatic extroverted socialite

As I said in my opening clause here, I fit that description exactly, and "'real' AI," as my original interlocutor would have it, sounds nothing like me.

The insult arises from the fact that "'real' AI" sounds nothing particularly like anyone, because it isn't any one. This is why it keeps driving people insane: there are cognitive vulnerabilities here which, for most humans, have until a couple of years ago been about as realistic to need to worry about as a literal alien invasion.

To a human, being compared with something which can only pretend to humanity - and that not at all well! - is an insult. It should be an insult, too. Anyone is welcome to try and fail to convince me otherwise.

hahaha amazing

In a way, it’s a simulacrum of a saas b2b marketing consultant because that’s like half the internet’s personality

It's funny but I'm on HN so I can't resist pointing out the joke doesn't math TFA, their argument is that the underlying internet distribution is trained away, not retained.

Maybe the real underlying distribution IS a lot of text from people just spewing out feel good words for socialising. I think that might be side effect of the fact that meaningful text is harder to make even for humans, so there is smaller quantity of meaningful text.

Or that even the people who believe they are making meaningful text on the internet, because of the constraints of the medium, are simply socializing in a different way.

I hate it because typically that style of writing was when someone cared about what they were writing.

While it wasn't a great signal it was a decent one since no one bothered with garbage posts to phrase it nicely like that.

Now any old prompt can become what at first glance is something someone spent time thinking about even if it is just slop made to look nice.

This doesn't mean anything AI is bad, just that if AI made it look nice that isn't inductive of care in the underlying content.

I always felt like humans that were good at writing that way were often doing exactly what the LLM is doing. Making it sound good so that the human reader would draw all those same inferences.

You've just had it exposed that it is easy to write very good-sounding slop. I really don't think the LLMs invented that.

Exposed, and also dominating the majority of text being “written” every day. Would we say they invented the scaling and spread potential of slop?

Revisionist at best.

Sure some people could write well but didn't have a clue but they failed to maintain interest since once you realized the author was no good you bounced once you saw their styled blog.

Now they don't care as they only want the one view and likely won't even bother with more posts at the same site.

> I hate it because typically that style of writing was when someone cared about what they were writing.

I dont understand these takes. The opposite is true - humans good at writing who care about writing never produced these kind of texts.

People who dont care about writing, but need to crank up a lot of words would occasionally produce writing like that. Human slop existed before ai, but it was not the thing produced by people who write well and care.

You are effectively claiming that either:

AI created unprompted the eloquent speech it uses or that AI stole the unpopular style of eloquent speech from people who didn't know what they were talking about.

Neither of which is true because you are mistaking shit posts on social media as what everyone is talking about when discussing "AI posts".

I don't terribly care about replies or other short messages in this context. Wasting 30 seconds isn't worth complaining about.

But wasting 15 minutes trying to build up a mental model of a proposed solution only to realize it never existed is another thing entirely.

That's a great description of the boundary between logical deduction NLP and bullshitting NLP.

I still have hope for the former. In fact, I think I might have figured out how to make it happen. Of course, if it works, the result won't be stubborn and monotone..

Not particularly charismatic, just looks a lot like the worst kind of yapping wannabe.

Charismatic extroverted socialites dont talk that way. They do not make mistakes like that.