So are you saying all LLMs were post-trained in that style then?

Because, well, there's a huge number of models. Are they all, as they say, "in cahoots"? (working together, clandestinely)

I'm one of the unlucky ones who has coincidentally trained myself over the past fifteen years to write in the style that is now largely recognized to be the ChatGPT style— bolded lists, clear section breakdowns with intro and concluding sentences, correct and liberal use of semicolons and em-dashes. The only parts of it I don't do are litter my text with random emojis or directly address the reader with simpering praise.

> That's exactly why a lot of us can detect it from a mile away.

Is that tested and proven or just gut feeling?

You must not have read a lot of blogs... This style is 100% the pretentious kind of writing that was in vogue.

This is very much our internal newsletter at work, which is actually still written by human hand (and we know it is, she can't stand "using those things”).

Point taken, but I'd like to raise some serious questions - is the 18 millionth post of someone whining about having to read text written by an LLM that much more of a substantive contribution?

Is it "thoughtful criticism" to have the same pedantic complaint made everywhere?

Is offering zero feedback to OP other than whining about the presence of LLM-written text in a README not a "shallow dismissal"?

What about "Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting."?

Or is snark the only rule that matters enough to warrant reminders about rules?

Sorry for inappropriately handling the frustration I get with this kind of repetitive, shallow, pedantic no-value-add whining clogging up HN any time any LLM-generated text ever accompanies any part of a featured article / link that never gets the same kind of warnings or moderation.

The people who make these kinds of complaints need to accept that LLM-generated text is a fact of life now - even in (or perhaps especially in) interesting technical projects. We all heard their complaints the first time, and the fiftieth time, and the five thousandth time - those complaints added no value to the relevant discussions then and they add no value to the discussion here, it's just bullies taking advantage of the latest snobby, diminutive way to shit on other people's work over what amounts to little more than subjective cosmetic preferences.

A tiny CPU-only TTS model is awesome. Why is it appropriate to derail the discussion about the actual technical innovation here with a low-effort complaint that's so common it has become a trope?