[paffdragon]

I was kind of interested in the content, but I am so overloaded with AI slop by now, that reading this generated text gives me nausea.

I was looking to see why they landed on this stack, but there are no alternatives or evaluation criteria listed - given the generated article, I wonder how much of the infra was selected by an LLM.

[willy__]

Claude helped write the article. It is 2026. I proof read it though and yes, giving an LLM a list of specific criteria of what you are looking for in a product is actually a pretty good experience.

[paffdragon]

If it works for you, it works. I just see the same phrases used repeatedly so frequently nowdays - including my own LLM conversations.

Regarding the use of LLM for picking infra. The issue I usually have with such task is that they frequently omit things - either from the list of options or the features compared. And depending on my familiarity with the topic, I might never notice, which might steer my decision making into a different direction. Basically a certain bias. Sometimes prompting it to repeat reveals more, but ultimately I end up hitting the search and doing my own research, then I might use the LLM again with now more knolwedge and data. Did you run into this too? What was your process?

[rmsaksida]

> Claude helped write the article. It is 2026.

If that's the case, why do we have to suffer through an AI-generated article? Just give us the prompt.

This topic interests me but I stopped reading as soon as I noticed the slop. I'd much rather read a couple of human-written paragraphs with your personal experience.