131–140 of 559 posts
i.e. only surface stories posted by or upvoted by those you trust, and the inverse with those you distrust.
Then exponentially drop off trust transitively and it could be almost workable.
I furthermore wish that "posting an LLM-generated comment (i.e. and passing it off as your own)" was worthy of an instant ban, because I see this sort of behavior from non-green accounts as well. EDIT: I meant (but totally forgot) to qualify that my "proposal" would only apply when the LLM-ness is self-obvious—idk, make up a "reasonable person" standard or something. Presumably, the moderators would err on the side o…
We're going to at least restrict Show HNs for a while. I do think this is relevant though: "HN can't be immune from macro trends" - https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
Please do so. And, forgive me if I speak heresy, but there has to be more proof of work (friction) to create accounts. I was shocked at how easy it is for something like chatgpt atlas to create new accounts on the fly.
The standard solution is using an email to register account, maybe a cloudflare captcha, and then using good network logging to group accounts by IPs and chainbanning abusive accounts when they are caught by other mechanisms.
I have long believed that whatever comes along to replace the reddit/HN etc type site will be based almost entirely on trust networks. i.e. only surface stories posted by or upvoted by those you trust, and the inverse with those you distrust. Then exponentially drop off trust transitively and it could be almost workable.
Like Facebook/Linkedin?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah it's weird, there was one case where I thought it was AI but wasn't sure. Several other comments pointed it out, too. Author claimed he wrote it manually. (Which is honestly even more concerning!) Maybe there can be a dedicated 'flag botspam' button? Then again it's a nuanced issue. I see AI used in a large percentage of writing now, so would this rule apply to the article as well?
> Maybe there can be a dedicated 'flag botspam' button? We already have flagging and downvoting?
I have long believed that whatever comes along to replace the reddit/HN etc type site will be based almost entirely on trust networks. i.e. only surface stories posted by or upvoted by those you trust, and the inverse with those you distrust. Then exponentially drop off trust transitively and it could be almost workable.
>will be based almost entirely on trust networks Like Facebook/Linkedin?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Without engaging in more ad hominem, that are wrong by the way, what's the issue with labeling AI content with what it is?
> what's the issue with labeling AI content with what it is 1. Your guess is not always correct 2. Over time, AI content will get harder to guess until it is indistinguishable from human content 3. You're not helping anyone by posting "this is AI". Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but it's not helpful. It just adds to the noise.
Ideally there could be a label on the submission that states it's AI
I furthermore wish that "posting an LLM-generated comment (i.e. and passing it off as your own)" was worthy of an instant ban, because I see this sort of behavior from non-green accounts as well. EDIT: I meant (but totally forgot) to qualify that my "proposal" would only apply when the LLM-ness is self-obvious—idk, make up a "reasonable person" standard or something. Presumably, the moderators would err on the side o…
We're going to at least restrict Show HNs for a while. I do think this is relevant though: "HN can't be immune from macro trends" - https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
I have long believed that whatever comes along to replace the reddit/HN etc type site will be based almost entirely on trust networks. i.e. only surface stories posted by or upvoted by those you trust, and the inverse with those you distrust. Then exponentially drop off trust transitively and it could be almost workable.