The revolt of the reader
112 points by chmaynard 5 hours ago | 30 comments

duhhhhh1212 3 hours ago
Someone should make a browser extension to label HN posts with Pangram results of the top 100 posts, so I don't waste my time reading crap.

Always a pleasure reading Bryan's writing; it's like Bryan is sitting there with you and saying the words (hard to convey the feeling).

reply
noir_lord 2 hours ago
Agreed, I like the Oxide podcast as well, even though it’s hardware I’m unlikely to ever see never mind use, it’s nice that someone somewhere is still trying to be what they are trying to be.

Having dealt with Enterprise Hardware(TM) in a previous job, it’s refreshing simply to see someone look at that pile of crap and go “it doesn’t have to be that way” and then actually set out to prove it.

reply
duhhhhh1212 52 minutes ago
They have a ton of rfds publicly available that are worth reading. Recently, read this one: https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/0161 because I'm researching clickhouse for my work (there is also a podcast ep on it). Even if you never use their hardware, just reading their work around the software they use/make is incredibly valuable as an engineer.
reply
pavo-etc 21 minutes ago
I would go even further, I want a browser extension that scans all words on every page and colours them more and more transparent as the likelihood of llm prose is increased.
reply
bcantrill 2 hours ago
That is honestly the highest possible praise -- thank you. And when this piece was starting to boil inside of me last night (triggered, I'm sorry to report, by an obviously LLM-authored guest blog entry from the Rust Foundation[0]), I messaged one of my colleagues: "Time to do what I do best: bluntly say what lots of people are thinking."

Glad those words proved prophetic!

[0] https://rustfoundation.org/media/how-the-rust-standard-libra...

reply
dcre 28 minutes ago
“Not every one of those 11,970 carries the same weight, and the paper is careful about that rather than rounding it up.”

AAUGH IT BURNS

reply
bcantrill 13 minutes ago
Right?! When I hit "That work was genuinely valuable" I literally hollered in exasperation.
reply
jonstewart 3 hours ago
AI slop really needs to be auto-flagged. It’s been like 20% of front page links I click on lately.
reply
mitxela 33 minutes ago
AI comments are auto-flagged, but not posts.
reply
ofjcihen 5 minutes ago
Look, in the future we may get to a point where LLMs are indistinguishable from humans in writing style.

Even then, I would say that using an LLM is robbing you of the process of writing, a process that is crucial to developing and understanding your own ideas.

Think about the last time you wrote something for consumption and the sentence to sentence thought processes you’re going through. I bet a lot of that was “is that right?” Or “does that make sense?” Or “am I communicating this at the level of my reader?”.

All of that is fundamental to your readers understanding, but more importantly, its fundamental to YOUR understanding.

reply
Lerc 2 hours ago
How can you tell if people can accurately identify AI generated text?

If a person reads AI generated text and does not notice, they by definition will not know about it.

There have been numerous cases of people accessing human created content as being AI.

There are instances where it seems relatively uncontroversial that it is AI generated, but without knowing both the amount of AI content people are exposed toand the amount that they register I don't think you can draw a conclusion of the overall state.

reply
rcxdude 22 minutes ago
I don't think this is about edge cases where someone has successfully disguised the writing to some degree: the current crop of LLMs have some pretty blatant (and frankly annoying) habits by default, ones that are hard to miss once you have read a decent amount of their output. If I had to describe them broadly, I would say they are a collection of habits which are common in certain kinds of persuasive and emotive writing, but are usually applied way out of proportion to the topic at hand, which tends to make the result quite grandiose, overly dramatic, and tiring to read: a LLM will often write a TODO app README like it's a cross between a thriller novel, a political speech, and a bombshell news article. There's lots of specific tics (and just by sheer volume and uniformity almost any habit an LLM picks up is going to rapidly shoot into cliche regardless of its own merit) but this is the general effect which I think is objectionable independent of the source of the text.

I do think the sensitivity to it can vary a lot: it depends a lot on how much and how closely you read the text, and how much exposure you have to LLM writing. Certainly it seems like a lot of people just don't really notice, or at least don't care much.

reply
dwattttt 58 minutes ago
Pieces that people aren't revolted by will be fine. Readers aren't revolting because of a flood of high quality writing though.
reply
Forgeties79 39 minutes ago
This is very handwavy and dismissive. It is pretty safe to assume that must of us catch it most of the time because the simple fact is so many people just copy and paste whatever the LLM outputs without even trying to edit it or mask that they used one. We’ve all seen so many examples of the exact same cadence and verbiage that we’ve learned how to identify it pretty reliably. The ones who are “slipping past us” are actually putting in the work make not just pasting raw LLM outputs, which is the real issue here. If somebody has edited it meaningfully after the fact then it’s not the same crime.
reply
jimbobimbo 59 minutes ago
I see this at work. People are "writing" specs and design proposals with bots. This is noticeable and is a huge turn off. I don't have issues with using bots to aid research, but I'm not reading the doc you slopped together.
reply
dyauspitr 8 minutes ago
This meme of trying to make it sound like LLM text is so obvious is a joke. It’s literally not, you can tell it to write in literally any style and given just a bit of an example of a person’s writing style, frontier models copy it completely and effectively. This argument can probably be leveled at vanilla raw output from an LLM, but even the slightest attempt at obfuscation bears solid fruit.
reply
turtleyacht 3 hours ago
A lot of similar pieces have not considered a post is both the first and final work of a thing: opinions, and experience, and less of much in cited facts; with AI, that there even was a revision pass at all.

I guess there is a kind of participatory element to the discourse where, if you want an audience, there is an editing process. Whereas in other cases, we wrote these as progress notes on an unknown journey, breadcrumbs or upturned stones to mark a path to the horizon.

Maybe it's the difference between writing as a mode of discovery, retreading the mental arc of a solution, and writing something honed to leave a mark.

reply
smitty1e 3 hours ago
You could use AI to come up with a draft, and to critique ahead of posting.

The chief grief appears to be phoning in the whole process.

reply
MarkusQ 2 hours ago
"I have fantasized about sentencing the author to read them aloud, certain that they themselves will be unable to endure the slop that they are foisting upon the rest of us.)"

I wish that were true, but I fear it may not be.

https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/07/canadian-legislator-reads...

reply
Forgeties79 23 minutes ago
>to use an LLM to write is to void the social contract between writer and reader: we readers shouldn’t be expected to labor to understand a sentence that the writer themselves didn’t work to create.

Pretty much sums up the issue re: workplace lazy AI dumping on folks as well.

reply
overgard 2 hours ago
In a way, I think they're doing us a favor with LLM slop: It's rare to have a signal that's 100% accurate at telling me it's safe to stop reading.
reply
cagenut 2 hours ago
if its not worth your time to write, its not worth my time to read

this goes 10x for all the slide decks and google docs and wikislop everyone's trying to pass off as an accomplishment lately

reply
edoceo 18 minutes ago
I hate to say this but AI assisted short pitch deks from founder to angel (usually their first time) have improved with AI. But also, they follow the same formula so are sorta obvious. Still, the decks are generally more business focused than typical founders early deck being very product/solution oriented.
reply
CharlesW 3 hours ago
> Indeed, Pangram has become important to so many of us that I was thrilled when Pangram Labs co-founder and CEO Max Spero joined us recently on Oxide and Friends.

Is obvious AI-assisted writing better or worse than an obvious PR quid pro quo and/or cross-promotion?

reply
bcantrill 2 hours ago
This is (obviously?) false, but considering how well-capitalized we are at the moment, you do have me wondering what a quid pro quo would be for; perhaps in this fictional universe Pangram has lucked into some of the PCIe clock buffers that we've been scrambling to secure enough of?
reply
CharlesW 2 hours ago
By "quid pro quo" I wasn't suggesting that Pangram's PR people's podcast placement was pay-for-play, just that they traded access for your positioning of their tech and their exec in your content marketing efforts.

That's pretty normal, but the point is that a blog post which is 35% Pangram promotion may not actually be less annoying than the use of AI to help write blog posts.

reply
mplanchard 2 hours ago
It is less annoying, at least to me. I can read a semi-promotional post. I just bounce right off LLM writing
reply
bcantrill 2 hours ago
Yeah, fair -- and definitely not: I am earnestly just a fan of what they built (and I also think it's really important as a way of getting a check against rampant LLM use).
reply
CharlesW 2 hours ago
Your love shines through! I'll work on turning down my "assume the worst" knob, thank you.
reply
throwaway219450 49 minutes ago
> Today, legitimate businesses are very careful about how they use bulk e-mail

I don’t think this is remotely true. Sure, they’re legally obliged to let you unsubscribe, and sure, it’s not dick pills, but every US company will immediately send you a newsletter when you purchase something, review requests and, if they/you use Shop for checkout, expect an abandoned cart reminder.

PR pieces and software companies don’t write tutorials to be helpful, they are advertising to you. If the LLM can do it for cheap, they really don’t care.

reply