And the idea of disregarding professional translations in favor of LLMs for quality reasons is breathtakingly...something. Arrogant? Naive?

At Oxbridge, for CS we still had lab work. We still had problem sets assigned for CS and for math which were graded. We had one large CS group project in, I want to say, our second year. Humanities students were still assigned essays. It's just that none of this stuff contributed to your final degree classification which was based entirely on your exams (although if you didn't do your CS practicals you wouldn't be allowed to pass).

Obviously Oxbridge isn't exactly representative but certainly my experience showed me that the American style is not the only way of making education work.

I mean, I'm more worried about the AI writing itself than people calling it out.

The AI articles on HN are an absolute disease. Just write your own damn articles if you're asking the rest of us to read them.

I don't think it's clear at all why people do this. I suspect a large amount of it, at least on a site like HN, is just hapless morons who think it's "cool".

Really wish the board had held the line on firing sama.

Well it's an inherently unprovable accusation, so assumption will have to do. It reeks of LLM-ese in certain word choices, phrases, and structure, though. I thought it was quite clear.

>It was great writing

Err... no accounting for taste, I suppose.

I don't want to set that aside either. Why is AI generated slop getting voted to the top of HN? If you can't be bothered to spend the time writing a blog post, why should I be bothered spending my time reading it? It's frankly a little bit insulting.

Meta managed to get into a private ebook torrent tracker called Bibliotik a few years ago to use for training Llama and the resulting publicity essentially killed the tracker.