News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why We're Banning AI by connicpu on Thursday October 15, 2026 @03:20PM (#50108856)
It's pretty obvious to me when someone just copy pastes claude spew onto a website and calls it a day. If they put in enough effort that I can no longer tell then sure, I will read that.
Re:Why We're Banning AI by meerita on Thursday October 15, 2026 @04:02PM (#50109459)
Personal perception will never be a reliable way to detect text written by LLMs, especially when people guide those LLMs with specific rules and instructions. It's virtually impossible. What you'll experience instead is your bias growing to the point where nothing will seem human-written anymore. You'll start assuming all text was generated by AI. It's pure AI paranoia.
Re:Why We're Banning AI by IshKebab on Thursday October 15, 2026 @03:31PM (#50109011)
Yeah it's pretty obvious now. But look at the improvements Anthropic made to Opus 5.5. It went from physically painful to read, to kind of annoying but tolerable. I wouldn't bet on it taking a long time to reach high quality prose.

Btw it is kind of weird how it still can't write prose normally but it can write impressively high quality code now. Must be something to do with their training. Or maybe it's easier to quantify good code.

Re:Why We're Banning AI by kimixa on Thursday October 15, 2026 @04:01PM (#50109442)
And this time next year I'll have 365 wives, and my CPU will run at 2 terrahertz.

Development and improvement is often very non-linear, assuming you can extrapolate forever is just as much guesswork as claiming it'll never change.

Re:Why We're Banning AI by YurgenJurgensen on Thursday October 15, 2026 @03:38PM (#50109136)
Just a few more hundred billion and it’ll be good, trust me bro.
Re:Why We're Banning AI by IshKebab on Friday October 16, 2026 @02:15PM (#50122172)
Uhm yeah probably. Are you suggesting that LLMs have been stagnant despite investment?

I don't understand your point. They're getting better so quickly it's hard to keep up.