This is true if you're writing a letter about a difficult topic.

For HN comments, 99.9% of the time, a short comment is a low effort one and should be disregarded.

For him, the cost of editing was much larger. Condensing your writing in his time meant rewriting it more concisely, requiring strictly more time than collecting his thoughts as he went.

With LLM's, we are in a new state of the world: it can expand any one sentence off hand remark in an essay.

Sure; I was using shorthand. Sometimes a whole edifice of ideas rests on one shaky one; and if you can challenge that one the whole thing falls apart. But even being able to identify the shaky one demonstrates engagement. That's really the key.

There are obvious exceptions to that rule. Laconic phrases are short but have a lot to them, while AI slop is long while having very little to it. But it's a decent rule of thumb when considering the middle of the bell curve.

Couldn't agree more.