6/23/2026 at 11:56:22 AM
The 'reading effort : meaning' ratio of this post is a bit painful.There are about 3 named concepts in every paragraph.
There are about 15 claims about named concept being the solution to a problem that's never explained.
At some point, if you try to make 20 different points, you make no point at all.
by nilirl
6/23/2026 at 12:06:47 PM
It's got all the indicators of being AI generated, so really not surprising at all. I lost track of how many "this, not that" and "this, but also" within a few paragraphs. LLMs tend to prefer sounding clever over simple terminology.by mathgeek
6/23/2026 at 3:03:55 PM
Same - I can sense the value here and I can see how I can transfer some of the ideas to my team (based on the image), but the volume of text diarrhea made me realise "this person took the lazy way out and didn't create something for their audience". I stopped reading at second paragraph.What I mean to say is that AI ghost writing is fine (I see the comment by the author). Deciding not to read poorly written content is also fine (and there's a reason why writing style has been discussed as long as the printed page has existed).
With the speed at which HN readers can identify mass produced, AI-generated word salad, it is insightful to look at a what users aren't able to stand back from their outputs and view them from the intended audience perspective
by thirtygeo
6/23/2026 at 4:46:20 PM
Absolutelyby tomrod
6/24/2026 at 2:50:27 AM
no, you're misinterpreting what its doing. It's not...Yes, what it's doing is using continuation phrases. It wants to continue, and these token-combos, like Tekken 4, let it move from one gradient descent to the next, and like Tony Hawk, perform combo after combo, so it can just keep producing tokens.
Because thats how they're trained. In another thread, someone wished they'd taught the models "I dont know" and were extremely convinced that some how you could train a model to stop producing tokens, or whatever. You can't both train the model to generate output and also teach it not to. That's their whole bag of tricks.
But it's not trying to be clever, it's trying to keep generating.
by cyanydeez
6/24/2026 at 12:23:35 PM
[dead]by cindyllm
6/23/2026 at 12:50:14 PM
Thank you for the feedback. I actually use AI as a ghost writer, but I am guilty: I usually tend to add too many concepts for a single article (even without AI).I usually follow Divio’s documentation to reference explanations and references, but it is not suitable for a blog post
by owulveryck
6/23/2026 at 2:20:26 PM
> I actually use AI as a ghost writerWith all due respect, it shows. You have the ability to write way better than this.
I was halfway through and thought to myself, "Why is this so fucking hard to understand the author's point?"
The subject sounds extremely timely and important and is something HN readers really crave, but the rambling article just isn't doing it justice.
by beej71
6/23/2026 at 3:24:51 PM
And for the love of reading, please do not bold stuff all the time. It's the single worst thing for reading attention. I can't help but jump from bolded text to bolded text and in the end I'm not reading anything.by tharkun__
6/24/2026 at 6:35:22 AM
This is an interesting feedback. I do that a lot to guide the reader’s system 1. I like reading article that have those emphasis. Maybe this is too much. I will investigate what are the good proportions.by owulveryck
6/23/2026 at 4:47:11 PM
The author is advised go avoid falling for AI Loopidity. It's more valuable to just share the bullet points someone feeds a prompt to produce a blogpost than to wade through AI slop of a blog post that people have to use AI to summarize.by tomrod
6/23/2026 at 9:44:34 PM
My co-worker and I call AI output like this “an overexertion of words:” the excessive jargon or concept-packing AI tends to do. “Overexertion” here being a collective noun like “a kaleidoscope of butterflies” or “a murder of crows.”by seandavidfisher
6/23/2026 at 5:23:47 PM
It refers to Team Topologies, which is mostly that. Management literature fluff with little substance, but many claims.Which then gives you great insights like
"a team can only be effective if it carries no more complexity than it can absorb."
by steve1977