First we need to think about why we consume content? I am happy to read llm created stuff when I need to know sth and it delivers 100%. Other reasons like "get perspectives of real humans", or "resonate" ... not so much
We're losing our voice to LLMs
311–320 of 425 posts
Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs
#312Where are these places where everything is written by a LLM? I guess just don’t go there. Most of the comments on HN still seem human.
> I guess just don’t go there.
How do you know? A lot of the stuff I see online could very much be produced by LLMs without me ever knowing. And given the economics I suspect that some of it already is.
Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs
#313Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it's how the algorithms promote engagement. They are destroying our democratic societies and should be heavily regulated. The same will become true for AI.
My view is that they are just exposing issues with the people in the said societies and now is harder to ignore them. Much of the hate and the fear and the envy that I see on social networks have other reasons, but people are having difficulties to address those. With or without social networks this anger will go somewhere, don't think regulation alone can fix that. Let's hope it will be something transformative not…
> Much of the hate and the fear and the envy that I see on social networks have other reasons
Maybe so, but do you really think actively amplifying or even rewarding them has no effect on people whatsoever?
Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs
#314Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most people on HN who advocate regulating social media don't only want to prevent those platforms from showing targeted inflammatory content, they want to make all algorithmic feeds other than strictly chronological illegal, as well as moderation of any legal content. From that point of view, Hacker News is little different than Facebook. One could even argue that HN's karma system is a dark pattern designed to breed…
At least HN karma is incremental and based on something approximating merit as opposed to being a slot machine where you never know which comment will earn Karma. More effort or rare insight, generally yields more karma.
That doesn't make it any less addictive or manipulative.
Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are already many AI-generated submissions on HN every day. Comments maybe less so, but I've already seen some, and the amount is only going to increase with time.
Every time I see AI videos in my YouTube recommendations I say “don’t recommend this channel” but the algorithm doesn’t seem to get the hint. Why don’t they make a preference option of “don’t show me AI content”
You assume that detecting AI content is trivial. It isn't.
Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs
#316A devils advocate in me would say that this post was authored by one of LLM models creator realizing they really need more fresh meat to train on.
I'm the OP. I can attest that I am not an LLM model creator! :)
I consider myself an LLM pragmatist. I use them where they are useful, and I educate people on them and try to push back on all the hype marketing disguised as futurism from LLM creators.
Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs
#317I'm in complete agreement with the idea that people should express themselves in their own words. But this collides with certain facts about U.S. adults (and students). This summary (https://www.nu.edu/blog/49-adult-literacy-statistics-and-fac...) reveals that:
* 28% of U.S. adults are at or below "level 1" literacy, essentially meaning people unable to function in an environment that requires written language skills.
* 54% of U.S. adults read below a sixth-grade level.
These statistics refer to an inability to interpret written material, much less create it. As to the latter, a much smaller percentage of U.S. adults can compose a coherent sentence.
We're moving toward a world where people will default to reliance on LLMs to generate coherent writing, including college students, who according to recent reports are sometimes encouraged to rely on LLMs to complete their assignments.
If we care to, we can distinguish LLM output from that of a typical student: An LLM won't make the embarrassing grammatical and spelling errors that pepper modern students' prose.
Yesterday I saw this headline in a major online media outlet: "LLMs now exceed the intelect [sic] of the average human." You don't say.
Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs
#318If you care about voice, you still can get a lot of value from LLMs. You just have to be careful not to use a single word they generate. I've had a lot of luck using GPT5 to interrogate my own writing. A prompt I use (there are certainly better ones): "I'm an editor considering a submitted piece for a publication {describe audience here}. Is this piece worth the effort I'll need to put in, and how far will I need to…
All of this sounds like something you could just do yourself after putting a piece down for a day or two and coming back to it with fresh eyes. What benefit is there of cooking the oceans with a bullshit generator? Like, sure, it's possible to do this with an LLM, but it's also possible to do it without, at roughly similar levels of effort, without contributing to all of the negative externalities of the LLM/genAI ec…
Because the complaints about the power and water usage of AI are mostly motivated reasoning. I don't like AI, therefore I'm going to find a reason not to like it. I
Listen, if it's Greta Thunberg pointing out that AI datacenters use a lot of resources, yeah, I'm willing to listen. But when the voices saying "but what about all the water/electricity is wasting" is coming from individuals I know personally haven't previously given a shit about the planet or conservation or recycling and have made fun of me for reusing things instead of throwing stuff into the garbage, I'm sorry, but those complaints from those individuals fall on deaf ears. Not saying you are, just a theme I've noticed with people in my life.
Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
One could absolutely push algorithms that personalize towards what the user wants to see. I think LLMs could be amazing at this. But that's not the maximally profitable algorithm, so nobody does it . As so many have said, enragement equals engagement equals profit. All my social media accounts are gone as well. They did nothing for me and no longer serve any purpose. TBF Bluesky does offer a chronological feed, but t…
Could someone use a third-party AI agent to re-curate their feeds? If it was running from the user's computer I think this would avoid any API legal issues, as otherwise ad and script blockers would have been declared illegal long ago. > but the well-intentioned blocklists just became the chief tool for the mean girls of the site. I've never used it, but yes this is what I expected. It would be better to have topical…
Yes, you absolutely can do this and back in the before times Facebook used to have an API that let you design your own interface to it.
But now I think that will be treated with as much derision by FAANG as ad blockers because you're preventing them from enraging you to keep you engaged and afraid. Why won't you think of the shareholder value (tm)?
But mandating API access would be fantastic government regulation going forward. Don't hold your breath.
Re: We're losing our voice to LLMs
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I personally dont feel like an ultra filtered social media which only shows me things I agree with is a good thing. Exposing yourself to things you dont agre with is what helps us all question our own beliefs and prejudeces, and grow as people. You are the one who gets to control what is filtered or not, so that's up to you. It's about choice. By the way, a social media experience which is not "ultra filtered" does…
For example, I deleted my account a month or so ago after discovering that the CEO of a popular cloud database company that I admired was following an account who posted almost exclusively things along the lines of "blacks are all subhuman and should be killed." It seems like you're better off knowing that. Without Twitter, you wouldn't, right? A venue that allows people to tell you who they really are isn't an unall…
That's a good way of thinking about it, thank you, legitimately.