I appreciate your feedback but my point is the delineation between "hey guys screw this guy he used AI" is getting harder and harder with each passing day.
As for me, I personally have been using "variants" of AI tooling since I studied AI about 30 years ago. So i dont know man.
Using AI is not wrong per se, but it's a fairly reliable sign that the piece might not be worth human attention.
A lot of people spend more than an hour writing a post and it usually results in a better experience for everyone.
It's too bad, though. Regardless of what hobby you're in, it's a golden age to have it.
A guy I knew used to write English even though it was a second language. It was charming. Now he uses ChatGPT and it sounds soulless.
I always find the economics around this annoying. I’d gladly pay $17 a year — hell ten times that — to not see ads on Instagram. However, the fact that I can and would pay for that means that Meta can’t afford to lose me, because it kills the value of their audience.
> $233 in 2024. 13x in 13 years
So yes you would in fact need to pay ten times that and then some. And by virtue of being on hacker news I'm guessing your actual ads targeting value is more like 20x that or more.
Is there a human-written long-form article to go with this?
Thank you for posting it.
What is more shocking what this does to people that have never been bored or cut off from media. The pure social media generation so to say.
I liked the idea attention measurement clock on the bottom of the page.
AI prose is low effort, even if your gathering of statistics and making charts was not. So that effort is undermined by the marker of AI prose which leads to an implication the rest of the data could be also, even if that is not actually the case.
Imagine approaching someone you wanna talk to and they just silently point to their assistant, suggesting you talk to them instead. I want to hear your thoughts from you, not filtered by some assistant/machine
Foobar8568•58m ago
hahahaa•53m ago