Eh, I think the tutorial is pretty readable? It's concise enough.
With the tutorial, the summary also makes more sense. I have not read the other parts yet, but so far I like what I see.
All is in pretty good taste, and I like what I've seen so far. I do not care if the author himself came up with the idea, or if AI came up with it and the author approved.
I do not understand why you "have to" know this to make use of it. You can judge ideas independently of where they came from (and you should).
> You can judge ideas independently of where they came from (and you should).
You can but in practice nobody does this because they don't have time. For example, once you have investigated ideas from a crank a couple of times - you don't do it again. Life is too short.
I found the language to be difficult to read, there are phrases that don’t make sense in context. It’s not concise. I also don’t care whether it was written with AI or not, and there are plenty of terrible docs predating AI. However, I wouldn’t call this documentation “good”.
This is actually a really good point that I think many people fail to understand these days!