Hacker News: assumed_throwaw

New comment by assumed_throwaw in "Any Human Ever – One life, drawn at random from all who have ever lived"

assumed_throwaw — Thu, 03 Sep 2026 21:19:20 +0000

I am genuinely puzzled as to why this kind of vibe-coded site are so popular on HN.

I consider the crowd here to be much smarter than I am, which is why I enjoyed the links that were shared and the discussions that followed.

The website is pretty, but the statistics and stories are the main point. Yet we are being fed hallucinated false claims, and somehow, that doesn't seem to be a problem...

I don't understand why it gets so many upvotes. We know Claude can create websites like this brilliantly now. The novel and interesting part is the transformation of the data. But if that part is sloppy, what's the point?

New comment by assumed_throwaw in "A Kantian Critique of "Sorry" by Justin Bieber"

assumed_throwaw — Sat, 22 Aug 2026 15:45:58 +0000

Pangram reports "100% AI" with "high" confidence...

New comment by assumed_throwaw in "A Kantian Critique of "Sorry" by Justin Bieber"

assumed_throwaw — Sat, 22 Aug 2026 14:56:05 +0000

I don't want this to seem like a witch hunt, but I got an unpleasant surprise when I ran the text through Pangram...

It got "100% AI" with "high" confidence, highlighting that it was likely "paraphrased or rewritten" [1].

I know Pangram gets a lot of flak, but so far I've found it to be pretty reliable, especially since they claim to have a very low false-positive rate.

I then compared it with the original version of the article published on the author's GitHub [2], but got the same disappointing result [3].

And now I'm stuck. I don't know whether I should believe Pangram or the author of the article...

[1] https://www.pangram.com/history/38ffe92b-0077-4bce-816a-b89b...

[2] https://github.com/Suranjandas7/public_writing/commit/6b08ad...

[3] https://www.pangram.com/history/e9fea5bf-a2cd-4ba2-b6b0-75e0...