Is Larry confessing that he's not in his best behavior whenever he's not being recorded?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C4%81na%CA%BBi
That's what private islands are for.
Larry Ellison: "Citizens will be on their best behavior because we’re recording"
181–190 of 283 posts
Re: Larry Ellison: "Citizens will be on their best behavior because we’re recording"
#182Bangladesh is one of the best example of it. People usually don't want to follow traffic laws on road. Now that we have AI camera recording and AI fine system, people try their best to follow traffic laws. We are becoming Japan following traffic laws in certain areas. Police usually were scared to fine million dollars cars (because the car owner might be part of something higher power and they could lose their job).…
Oh wow I went and looked that up after reading your comment. Launched less than a month ago! Incredible that you're seeing such impact already
Yay lazy cops who never did their jobs anyway??
Re: Larry Ellison: "Citizens will be on their best behavior because we’re recording"
#1831984
Re: Larry Ellison: "Citizens will be on their best behavior because we’re recording"
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uuuugh. The AI smell is strong on this comment. Please use AI for loads of things, but also pretty-please keep it out of inter-human discussions.
This does not read as AI to me at all
Is there an actual quantitative check that says "AI or not AI"? I'm genuinely curious.
So far as I can tell, AI prose checking - at least vs the frontier models - has been little better than vibe-based. Which, well, that's just another way of saying Red doesn't like Blue. And we got enough of that.
Re: Larry Ellison: "Citizens will be on their best behavior because we’re recording"
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is copied straight from an LLM. Do folks make no attempt at humanizing their LLM outputs? Is that even worth doing? I personally wish you guys would - the moment I realize I'm reading an LLM-generated comment, my interest immediately wanes and I stop reading.
Hate that I'm biting on this, but this isn't constructive, whereas AI generated or not, the comment above is. It is the top one, it is succinct, and it articulates the point clearly. You seem to lament AI and given the context of that comment, the author presumably does too. The world is moving faster and faster towards AI first so kicking an screaming "That's AI" will not help. AI generated noise sucks, nut this is…
I simply disagree. If I wanted an LLM's opinion, I would forego HN entirely and just use ChatGPT. I browse forums like this to get organic opinions from real people.
When I see someone post an LLM reply, it makes me wonder - is the reply synonymous with their actual opinion, only formatted better? Or are they attempting to disguise an LLM output as something of their own? The former I am much more OK with, but the latter irks me for reasons I haven't fully considered and you have me thinking about.
"Calling out" AI comments has felt like somewhat of a duty, heh, but maybe we've reached a point of no return. I still value a real, organic opinion, though, no matter how well an AI can summarize it.
Re: Larry Ellison: "Citizens will be on their best behavior because we’re recording"
#186[deleted]
Re: Larry Ellison: "Citizens will be on their best behavior because we’re recording"
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uuuugh. The AI smell is strong on this comment. Please use AI for loads of things, but also pretty-please keep it out of inter-human discussions.
This does not read as AI to me at all
It does. It's still a good text. It's also definitely a result of human-AI collaboration (to what extent - hard to say; could be AI edits in human-written text, could be a longer prompt and AI expanding it, something like that).
The it's-not-X-it's-Y formula is the most visible tell. It's overused, being used, I think, 3 times, with 2 being slightly less obvious. This-was-X-and-now-it's-Y is also overrepresented.
It's still not a bad comment. We can discuss it just fine. What we can't do now is assume this is entirely an EastLondonCoder's text, so we can't use it to form an opinion of that person (whether good or bad) based on its content (since we don't know how much of it comes from that person, and how much from the machine). Some will also form an opinion (good or bad) about the poster simply because they used AI.
That's an Internet discourse of 2026, in my experience. I wonder what's next.
Re: Larry Ellison: "Citizens will be on their best behavior because we’re recording"
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
This does not read as AI to me at all
Is there an actual quantitative check that says "AI or not AI"? I'm genuinely curious. So far as I can tell, AI prose checking - at least vs the frontier models - has been little better than vibe-based. Which, well, that's just another way of saying Red doesn't like Blue. And we got enough of that.
> Is there an actual quantitative check that says "AI or not AI"? I'm genuinely curious.
There are plenty of them that will give you a number, Pangram is a commonly-used one. Of course, whether they actually work well is a different matter. In my experience they have a huge false positive rates. I haven't tested the inverse.
Re: Larry Ellison: "Citizens will be on their best behavior because we’re recording"
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is kinda what is going on in China.
And that's what the Larry Ellisons of the world want. One of the bigger lies ever told is that free-market economies help democratize nations. They don't. If they did, we would have made massive investments in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Marxist-Leninist governments there. Instead we decided to invest in China and, later, Vietnam, among others. These are two very non-democratic nations. Why did we do that, e…
> They don't. If they did, we would have made massive investments in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Marxist-Leninist governments there.
Ummm, what? Have you been to Eastern Europe lately (minus Ukraine, Belarus and Russia)? They're basically the west, except cleaner and less crime-ridden.