Skip to content

Comment on The Computer at the Bottom of a Canal

Comments

I don't think this is AI, but the writing style keeps reminding me of AI. I'm trying to isolate why. I think it's something to do with the information density. The sentences twist and turn, have lots of related ideas, digressions, and little details without much lead-in. The wording is also very precise, which is another characteristic of AI writing. This sounds like a critique, but I actually find it charming.

This sentence is a strong illustration of what I'm talking about:

Since only OBJEKT ever knew where anything physically lived, objects could be relocated freely without touching a reference, so garbage collection went into the silicon too: a two-space compacting collector that walked the live objects and slid them into the other half of DRAM while execution carried on above, oblivious.

I mean, come on. Run-ons are one thing, but this is practically a lecture in a single sentence. :P

Very well-written text, not a whiff of AI generation to it.

Your example is not even a run-on sentence!

I enjoyed reading it, many thanks to the author.

I really enjoyed it, but I think there’s more than a whiff.

That curve is gone. The compromise is going with it; and the workload-shaped machine, the thing Harland was building in 1984, is what comes back.

Nope, and Pangram agrees with me, 100% human written with high confidence.

I really enjoy this style and I think it's not _that_ close to AI output (it's much better in fact).

I was never arguing that it was AI-written.

Right, this was in response to tclancy.

Yeah I'm not sure, just identifying that subjectively, this is the impression I get. Maybe I just associate any style which is especially fluent and avoids vernacular with AI at this point.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.