I was in agreement and had high expectations with the ai;dr abbreviation usage until I read the article.

For me, writing is the most direct window into how someone thinks, perceives, and groks the world. Once you outsource that to an LLM, I’m not sure what we’re even doing here. Why should I bother to read something someone else couldn’t be bothered to write?

Agreed. If you cannot put effort into something you want to convey why should I? But, then comes the next paragraphs.

I’m having a hard time articulating this but AI-generated code feels like progress and efficiency, while AI-generated articles and posts feel low-effort and make the dead internet theory harder to dismiss.

So, AI assisted coding is progress but AI assisted writing is not? Sounds hypocritical.

and call me an AI luddite, I use LLMs pretty extensively for work. Claude Code has been tearing into my token budget for months now. I can’t imaging writing code by myself again, specially documentation, tests and most scaffolding.

You cannot imagine writing code by yourself but expect others to write articles by themselves?

Growing up, typos and grammatical errors were a negative signal. Funnily enough, that’s completely flipped for me. The less polished and coherent something is, the more value I assign to it.

But eh, broken English and a lack of capitalization is now just a simple skill away so does it even matter?

The same can be said for coding. You are getting AI to put the effort instead of doing that yourself. Why should I trust your code? I dislike Vibe coding and LLM generated articles. They lack the authenticity a real person’s work would’ve.