zlacker

> This is a GitHub web page for the repository "rfc-evidence" owned by user "nrdxp". The page contains the file "rfc_evidences_experiences.md" which is part of the repository's master branch. The page includes various HTML, CSS, and JavaScript files that are used to render the GitHub user interface. The page provides metadata about the repository, such as the description, analytics, and social media sharing information. Overall, this appears to be a standard GitHub repository page for a project called "rfc-evidence".

Time saved: 171 minutes.

Thanks Kagi-search summarizer....

>>traver+(OP)
Did you notice your AI didn't speak at all about the content and only provided obvious info that you get at a glance when loading the page? For the tiny relevant part of the summary anyway.

But I suspect no AI will be able to provide correct understanding of this, we are sorely lacking context here.

Also, you guys providing LLM generated stuff in HN comment keep convincing me I should not invest time in this stuff.

"this page provides HTML and CSS to render GitHub's UI", no joke.

(edit: fixed IA -> AI)

>>jraph+z
The punchline to that was "178 minutes saved", and that the "IA" wasn't able to provide any useful information out of it.

If you're not familiar with these tools, that is very abnormal output for one of them. Normally they'd be able to provide a reasonable summary for all of this.

So taken in that context, the subtext is "is this worth any of our time"?

I did link directly to the RFC in another comment, which I think is more worth people's time.

>>traver+91
Ok, so you just meant you believe there's nothing interesting in there? Because I believe it would be easier to understand phrased this way instead of putting a LLM-generated summary in the middle, and maybe would somewhat invite you to say why you think this.

Many people first degree post clueless LLM-generated stuff indistinguishable from your comment as-is.