Hm, Andros I do have my doubts - I know that you are a proponent of generative AI. We had a discussion over your outspoken opposition to https://human-emacs.org/.
I also know that you are an excellent writer/thinker, even prior to the advent of generative AI.
I'm in two minds here, and don't want to insinuate that you are outright lying, but I do believe your workflow relies on generative AI.
> NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
If you do use generative AI, it feels hypocritical to use this licence while using a technology that essentially tries to circumvent the copyright issue by remixing, transforming and building upon the material it has ingested.
> This kind of comment loses a lot of its weight by being posted here on HN instead of sent privately. If this were really a good-faith question, a DM would have done it.
I'm sorry if it came across as a personal attack, it wasn't the intention.
It felt like the right place to comment. The article is public, the accusations are public, the licence is public and you made your position on generative AI public on the human-emacs project.
You expressed your position on the human-emacs publicly and we had a good discussion over it, in public. To me, this was on the same level.
I don't think that half of a conversation should be done via DM, while the other is made public.
> This is the real damage this kind of thing does. It breaks the quiet deal that used to exist between a writer and a reader: you put out content, and got at least some minimal credit for the work behind it. Now there's none of that left. No credit, no gratitude, not even the confidence that a human read it. That's exactly why there's less and less original content being written.
I agree, but you have to blame the right entity here. It's not the readers' fault that a deluge of AI generated content flooded the internet.
Generative AI broke that "quiet deal", not the readers. The readers are as much a victim as is the author who writes the content.
Generative AI came with a ton of negative side effects for the entire population. This is one of them.
Interestingly enough I read your article in elfeed, and came here for the comments as I was getting suspicious of the use of generative AI, which I refuse to read.
blog now disclose: "AI is one more tool. I use it for mechanical tasks: polishing the wording, catching typos, suggesting synonyms, improving or adapting code blocks and translating the article between Spanish and English."
I'm the author of Datastar and I find this response hilarious given you didn't reach out to me about correctness in public or private. Your content is full of incorrect statements. I even posted in the comments of the video to try to correct the FUD. You didn't do real effort and it shows
blog now disclose: "AI is one more tool. I use it for mechanical tasks: polishing the wording, catching typos, suggesting synonyms, improving or adapting code blocks and translating the article between Spanish and English."
Third option: just be honest. Perhaps even apologize. The post is unequivocally Ai slop. Moreover, the style doesn't match your comments here, or other blog posts, at all.
Here’s a little analogy: I’ve been composing electronic music for 35 years now, and some people still think it’s just a matter of pressing buttons, that it’s easy, that anyone can do it the same way, that I do this because I don’t have what it takes to learn to play a “real instrument” and that I’m not a “real musician”.
You get used to it, and eventually you stop caring. Too bad for them if they’re more interested in the process than in the work itself.
I don't think that's a good analogy. Learning a "real" instrument is extremely difficult and takes thousands of hours. Writing your own blog post without AI takes like half an hour.
It's not really because everyone learns at school. And in fact it only takes a few years (my kids are going through it now and I was surprised at how quickly they went from not being able to read at all, to having better handwriting than me).
It's like, learning a language is really hard. Learning your native language is super easy, barely an inconvenience.
So I think I would be more accepting if he said "sorry I can't speak English because it's a second language so I used AI to help", but he didn't.
I think you both had a different meaning behind the verb 'write'. You clearly refer to the physical act of writing, while OP refer's to writing as an author (ie be enjoyable to read), which most people never achieve.
HTMX v4 doesn't actually address what's makes Datastar work at it's core. It at best it copies some of the broad strokes of the API but not in a robust it efficient spec compliant way
