> Don't post generated comments or AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Your entire comment history seems to be AI generated.

> No Visual Studio installation. No GUI. No prayer. Just a script that does exactly what it says.

Yeah its obvious clanker writing. I don't even mind using LLM for code but this rubs the wrong way.

Please don't use AI for posting comments.

Sorry, English is not my native language like billions of people on the planet.

Then why make a product whose purpose it is to convey written technical information to users of that language, if it's also a language that you need assistance in to communicate properly with?

I couldn't tell they replied to me with AI (it didn't read like it did to me, but I could be wrong).

But even if they did, one thing I'm sympathetic to is that English is not everyone's first language. Again, I don't know if that applies here, but it's a good reason that some might want to run their comments through an LLM. I don't think there should be a blanket rule on this.

Looks like Logic Pro.

"* Also runs on Linux/Mac (including apple silicon) via Wine *"

Their website makes their definition of portable very clear in "What makes a portable app special?".

It's quite clear they mean more a (much) stricter variation of the "no installation" definition than the "easily buildable on other OS" definition. Though they do mention execution under translation environments as a requirement.

That's not what the message you linked claims at all. Maybe you missed the "in this message" at the end of the sentence?

No not really - I don’t think choosing to post from an alternative email removes the association issue that the original intent is trying to capture.

> I don't know its origins (tumblr emo crowd??)

You're almost a century off :) https://www.bauhaus-bookshelf.org/bauhaus_writing_in_small_l...

There's an option to switch back to the original 4:3 ratio.

Claude Opus 4.1:

"I'll search for the current status of seahorse emoji to give you the most up-to-date information.

No, there is no seahorse emoji in the official Unicode standard, and there never has been one. The Unicode Consortium, which is responsible for approving and standardizing emojis, has not included a seahorse in any of its emoji releases.

Interestingly, this is a well-documented example of the "Mandela Effect" - a phenomenon where groups of people collectively misremember something that never actually existed. Many people are convinced they've seen or used a seahorse emoji before, but it's likely they're either experiencing a false memory or remembering seahorse stickers or emoji-style images from messaging apps that aren't part of the standard Unicode set.

A seahorse emoji was actually proposed to Unicode in 2018 but was declined, and there hasn't been a successful proposal since. If you'd like to see a seahorse emoji added in the future, you can submit a proposal to the Unicode Consortium, though the approval process is quite rigorous.

So while we have plenty of other sea creatures like tropical fish, octopus, crab, lobster, squid, and dolphin, the seahorse remains notably absent from our emoji keyboards!"

This content is oddly similar to what one can read at [1]. So much so that it feels like plagiarism.

There's no reason LLMs don't also do this with code by the way.

[1] https://emojipedia.org/seahorse-emoji-mandela-effect

not only that, but, if a LLM can actually complete a code task it's a good sign that that problem has a public code repository solving it (usually in a way that is better than what the LLM offers)

Having read the above conversation excerpt and the page you linked... how do you get to it feeling like plagiarism? Given a constrained set of information here, there's only so many ways to present the information. They roughly discuss the same data points, but the writing is different in both. Is this disallowed?

Take the "seahorse sticker or emoji-style image" part.

It's the exact same words. It is quite specific phrasing. There's no other result on the web for this.

It's not only this part, the whole thing feels very similar, just with more confidence and in a sublty different order.

When the set of ideas and the phrasing are this similar without citing the source, I call this plagiarism.

Now, it could be that the emojipedia page is AI slop, but then the AI would seem to have invented this specific phrasing, which I would find unlikely.

It could also be that the UI shows citations but they don't survive copy-paste.

What if it’s the other way around? Your linked article is based on AI slop? Nowadays, you cannot be sure.

"morbus" also means disease, not just death.