You don't even need to read past the first timeline entry. The name "Marcus Chen" is literally a meme within AI creative writing circles due to how often Claude defaults to that exact name when naming fictional characters.
Your comment was autokilled because our software classified it as AI-generated :) It was a false positive and another user has since vouched for it.
For the record: we never delete anything, aside from very rare cases in which a user asks us to delete something for privacy reasons. Plenty of posts get killed by flags or software filters (spam, abuse, etc), but these can all be seen by turning 'showdead' on in your profile.
Quite the opposite. That user's comment was killed because it was classified as AI-generated. Of course it was a false positive due to the AI-generated text they quoted. These systems aren't foolproof. But we're very serious about preserving HN for curious conversation between humans.
> But we're very serious about preserving HN for curious conversation between humans.
How does that work when most of the articles posted are now AI generated?
I've ranted about this before, but the gist of the problem is that you're expecting humans to put effort into discussing something that the "author" did not consider worth the effort of creating. There's a fundamental imbalance there that causes the whole "the author put effort into creating this so you should put effort into discussing it" system that encourages high-effort posting to fall apart.
If it’s bad writing it’s not a good fit for HN and should be flagged. Writing that’s obviously AI-assisted is bad writing. We’re fine with it being flagged and down-weighted off the front page. We routinely refrain from re-upping posts that are obviously AI-assisted. Things still slip through because we don’t see everything in advance.
The entire article is just one long stream of short, punchy, declarative sentences. The latest Claude models are notorious for writing like this.
There's also a few cookie-cutter patterns that should immediately jump out at you if you're at all familiar with AI writing, such as:
> No hardware identifier is transmitted. No attestation is required. No certification layer determines who may participate. User privacy is structurally preserved, not promised.
> Google Cloud Fraud Defense is not a reCAPTCHA update. The QR code is the visible mechanism, but device attestation is the real product.
Only downsized? I would expect them to cease to exist entirely in the coming years, as western companies begin to realize that AI is cheaper and more competent than the Indian firms they usually outsource work to.
What does this accomplish? You could always write some words on a paper and then throw that paper into a fire, you don't need the internet to do that.
The whole appeal of the internet was that you could write about some random niche thing you liked and reliably find other people who liked the same thing. It was never about screaming into a void or otherwise "doing things for yourself". It sucks now specifically because whatever you "do for yourself" is now far less likely to be seen by anyone else who cares than it has ever been before.
That hasn't been my experience. The problem is do you expect it to be seen by thousands upon thousands of people? That wasn't a thing back then and it's not now either. You get a handful of hits, as you always did. The big numbers are the algorithm's game, though for many people, they've become normalized. If 1000 people see your niche little project, that's a failure by modern standards. That was huge success for a noname nobody 20+ years ago.
I feel like we're talking about fundamentally different things here. I'm not talking about Show HN style "look at my project, everyone!" stuff. I'm talking about literally just speaking to other like-minded people about your interests, on an equal level, without any expectation of garnering attention for yourself.
To find these spaces, you have to think in reverse. You can’t look for the community first. You have to start by having a specialized interest. You can’t rely on an algorithm to tell you what you care about and how you want to spend the time in your life. That answer has to come from within. Once you have that answer, finding the community online is quite easy.
The way you find them is to search for the creators and other community leaders. For example, let’s say you are interested in a specific video game. Look for the publishers, developers, top players, live streamers, and media coverage of that game. Those people are likely to be hosting or participating in communities that you can join, even if they are closed Discord servers.
They are almost always Discord servers, ruled by terminally online powertripping weirdos who will make your life hell if you even slightly offend them, where knowledge and discussion go to die because none of it is searchable and whatever was being talked about 5 minutes ago is already forgotten.
This has nothing to do with what the internet used to be like.
So exactly like textboards in the 1990s, except powertripping discord mods just ban you. Aggrieved sysops would target you with malware before banning you.
I suspect it's not that simple. Last week I noticed I already had it downloaded on one of my devices, even though I'm sure the number of websites already using this API is miniscule.
Why? None of what you did is special. What stops anyone else from asking their AI to implement the same feature you did, if they need it?
reply