This was written by AI, wasn't it?<p>I feel like it said a whole lot without giving me much to take action on. Like great, you summarized the current state of affairs but it doesn't make clear what I am to do about it.
Are you making this claim specifically about this one particular post, or about everything on the blog, which dates back about a decade ?<p>Like "These Artemis 2 photos were generated by AI" is wrong but "The broadcast footage of the Apollo missions was generated by AI" is incredibly stupid and I want to understand if I'm about to engage with an incredibly stupid opinion.
> I feel like it said a whole lot without giving me much to take action on. Like great, you summarized the current state of affairs but it doesn't make clear what I am to do about it.<p>To be fair, not every article is a call to action. Sometimes they exist purely for informational purposes.
It definitely feels like it was edited with AI, structure and tone seem like the usual AI "polish".<p>Lately I've been working on an embedded system with limited access to std lib/libc and this was very interesting but I was hoping to see more information, like how can I tell if something will be supported? what are alternatives? what does implementation specific mean?<p>I guess I am used to HN having more in-depth articles.