Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 1001 posts

Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans

#261

Post by NewsaHackO »

jaysonelliot wrote: post #100
Someone1234 wrote: post #84

"AI-edited comments" is a very interesting one. Where is the line between a spelling/grammar/tone checker like Grammarly, that at minimum use N-Grams behind the scenes, and something that is "AI" edited? What I am asking is, is "AI" in this context fully featured LLMs, or anything that improves communication via an automated system. I think many people have used these "advanced" spellcheckers for years before Chatgpt…

You should use your own words. It might seem that a tool like Grammarly is just an advanced spellcheck, but what it's really doing is replacing your personal style of writing with its own. It's better to communicate as an individual, warts and all, than to replace your expression with a sanitized one just because it seems "better." Language is an incredibly nuanced thing, it's best for people's own thoughts to come t…

>It's better to communicate as an individual, warts and all, than to replace your expression with a sanitized one just because it seems "better."

It is definitely not true that it is better for a poster to communicate like an individual when it comes to spelling and grammar. People ignore posts that have poor grammar or spelling mistakes, and communications that have poor grammar are seen as unprofessional. Even I do it at a semi-subconscious level. The more difficult or the more amount of attention someone has to pay to understand your post, the less people will be willing to put in that effort to do so.

Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans

#262

Post by gbear605 »

jmuguy wrote: post #244
bondarchuk wrote: post #167

All the weak excuses posted here are just making me lean more towards a hardline policy. No I don't want to read a human-generated summary of your llm brainstorming session. No I don't want to read human-written text with wording changes suggested by an llm. No I don't want to read an excerpt from llm output even if you correctly attribute it. I acknowledge this is partly just my personal bias, in some cases really n…

Beyond folks for whom English is a second language, I agree with you. I don't understand why people are immediately trying to find some loophole in this with spelling, grammar, etc checks. We just want to communicate with you, and if you sound like an idiot without the help of an LLM then maybe work on that rather than pretending to be Hemingway.

Traditional translation tools still work, and they're pretty darn good still.

Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans

#264

Post by jajuuka »

This seems like an overcorrection. There is a vast difference between someone copy and pasting from an LLM and using one to correct their English or improve their writing ability.

Rules like this seem to me more like fomenting witch hunting of "AI comments" than it is about improving the dialogue. Just about any place I've seen take this hardline stance doesn't improve, it just becomes filled with more people who want to want to pat each other on the back about how bad AI is.

Just my two cents. I don't filter my comments through any AI, but I am empathetic for people who might have great use of them to connect them to the conversation.

Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans

#265

Post by cobbal »

DonThomasitos wrote: post #62

The irony is that this guide is written like a system prompt. We‘re all working with LLMs too much these days.

Here's a version from 2014 in the same style if you're curious: https://web.archive.org/web/20140702092610/https://news.ycom...

Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans

#266

Post by gleenn »

juleiie wrote: post #201
bondarchuk wrote: post #167

All the weak excuses posted here are just making me lean more towards a hardline policy. No I don't want to read a human-generated summary of your llm brainstorming session. No I don't want to read human-written text with wording changes suggested by an llm. No I don't want to read an excerpt from llm output even if you correctly attribute it. I acknowledge this is partly just my personal bias, in some cases really n…

Look, you can make all the rules you want but in the end vibe check is the only way to have any sort of quality. Look at Reddit… abundance of rules do not save that place at all. It’s all about curating what kind of people your site attracts. Reddit of course is a business so they don’t care about anything other than max number of ad views. Small non profit forums should consciously design a site to deter group(s) of…

I feel like you are being a bit contradictory: the suggestion is to dissuade AI content - isn't that "design[ing] a site to deter group(s) of people that they don't want"? I personally don't want to vibe check every HN comment if I can avoid it, I don't even think you can quantify that in any meaningful way. We can engender a site like that at least in spirit. It may be equally as difficult but it's still worth fighting for.

Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans

#267

Post by tempestn »

thousand_nights wrote: post #143
Someone1234 wrote: post #84

"AI-edited comments" is a very interesting one. Where is the line between a spelling/grammar/tone checker like Grammarly, that at minimum use N-Grams behind the scenes, and something that is "AI" edited? What I am asking is, is "AI" in this context fully featured LLMs, or anything that improves communication via an automated system. I think many people have used these "advanced" spellcheckers for years before Chatgpt…

i don't care if someone has bad grammar, i want to hear their thoughts as they came up with them, we're all intelligent beings and can parse the meaning behind what you write. i type my comments without capitalization like i'm typing into some terminal because i'm lazy and people might hate it but i'm sure they prefer this to if i asked an LLM to rewrite what i type your writing style is your personality, don't let a…

I, on the other hand, find incorrect grammar mildly annoying, especially when it's due to laziness. It distracts from the thoughts being conveyed. I appreciate when people take the time to format comments as correctly as they're able.

In fact, I'd argue that lazy commenting is the real problem, which has now been supercharged by LLMs.

Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans

#268

Post by altairprime »

alterom wrote: post #225

[flagged]

AI coding versus AI writing may be a useful lens to focus through; while I personally abhor both, HN seems extremely positive about the former and (now) extremely negative about the latter. I hope that policy is extended to all YC startups someday :)

Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans

#270

Post by Adiqq »

chrystianpl wrote: post #82

As English is my second language and as I have dyslexia. I was just wondering what do you mean by "AI-edited comments"? I can't ask an llm to check if I have made correct grammar/fix it and then as I was on other account, down-voted because of my styling/grammar, not because of the content?

I don't really see the issue, as long as there's human thought behind whatever anyone posts. It's frustrating to argue against someone that lazily uses AI, but if argument is fair, then I don't care if that's written by AI or human, what difference does it make? It's frustrating, if someone is incoherent and makes dumb argument, but again, I don't care if it's dumb argument from human or machine.

For me it sounds just as yet another form of gatekeeping, so either you sound human or you're not good enough to post/comment. Like, really? How isn't that genetic fallacy? It doesn't matter what someone thinks, because someone used AI to make their thought clearer, so their whole argument is trash? Like it has to hurt to read and write, if you're not using English perfectly and your work is seen as inferior based on superficial factors like proper grammar and style?

It's dumb crusade, I did not use AI to write this comment, but I hate when people try to monopolize the truth and tell who is "better, smarter" based on irrelevant facts. Not using AI doesn't make anyone superior. Using AI also doesn't make you superior. Focus on what you mean, because that's what matters.

Post reply on HN