I'm not a data analyst. Almost everything pertaining to data analysis of the log is perplexity labs.
I'm also not a journalist and the article I wrote didn't sound professional and was too long. So I had AI change it to have a professional tone and structure and then edited it.
I'm also not an artist and I had AI generate a picture of a bear reading a newspaper. Then I used krita to remove the background and make it transparent.
I also asked the AI to generate 10 headlines, it gave me this one:
How a monopoly ISP weaponizes support incompetence against technical customers
Calls out systemic issue, appeals to HN's anti-monopoly sentiment
Then I changed it to:
How a monopoly ISP refuses to fix upstream infrastructure
Yes I leveraged expertise from three fields outside of my skillset to simplify a task, bounce back ideas, and conclude with a superior end result. It was demonstrably effective and it would have been stupid to spend 4x the effort to receive zero traction.
If you are not a journalist, and AI is your editor, then you should remove the statement on your site that calls itself a newspaper. Newspapers have journalists and editors.
Though you did your original message a disservice. Now we are left wondering how forthcoming, honest and friendly you were with that support staff. I'd also try to cheap out if I'd have to deal with a rude and/or dishonest customer. I'm not saying you were, but it's hard for us to know if you throw things at us like "why should I care?" You need to understand that this causes certain reactions.
I personally don't mind at all that you used AI to make your writing more accessible. To the contrary, I think it's a very suitable use of the tool and I would do the same.
But don't you realize what impression you are conveying to the audience here by being so strongy defensive? To the point of lashing out at bystanders like me? That's exactly what makes people wonder how you interacted with the company that you are so strongly (and likely rightfully) criticising.
To answer your question, by "owning up" I meant admitting to using AI for the text after initially denying it. Again, no judgement on my end for having used it. Apologies if my choice of the term implies a judgement to you. That wasn't my intention.
That’s literally what using an AI to write content is. The fact that you’re not seeing that and are resorting to these kind of ridiculous comments says enough.
Sorry, but the semantic constructs used in the article, the em-dashes, the use of ± signs that nobody ever uses, the typical bold formatting, the fact that your brother posts AI generated comments on your blog, it’s just too much.
I don’t blame you for it, writing a blog post like this without AI takes days of work. But at least own up to it, instead of now playing innocent that you didn’t lie.
No you didn’t lie, you omitted the part you also used AI to write the copy when confronted.
> the em-dashes, the use of ± signs that nobody ever uses
It is a bit saddening that correct punctuation is now a sign of dishonesty. I use em dashes and keep seeing people say it's such a dead giveaway. Now it's also ± which I also use. Are multiplication signs instead of "x" next? Or degree symbols? What can I still use if I want people to not think I'm too dumb to write my own text
You mention more signs (semantics, choice of what to embolden) but they're not binary signs (present → it's generated) and basically guesswork
What route dude I made an article to bring attention to the issue and the attention has been brought. Why do you want me to do things your way? I do things my way just fine. There's always someone to tell you that you should do this or that. Why should I do this or that? You do this and that if that's whats important to you. And if you want me to do this and that then convince me why I should.
You shouldn't lie about your work because that harms society (if you care about us) and society also will punish you (if you care about yourself). If you don't care about yourself or the people around you, then I have no idea why you should care.
I hate this aspect of HN, on other websites I can just block these types of sociopaths/trolls at their first message. But here I end up wasting my time and energy or I'll look bad.
Exactly. If the author says "parts of the article was written by AI", that's probably it, nobody will waste any more time on this because this is what the author has decided to do.
But instead the author seems to hide the fact of using AI under the discussion where some people find it distasteful to use AI. That doesn't help.
my internet has been broken for 17 months but you're more upset about me using ai to make my sentences sound professional than about comcast refusing to fix their infrastructure
