THANK YOU!!
Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans
281–290 of 1001 posts
Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans
#282All 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…
[deleted]
Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans
#283[deleted]
Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans
#284My fear is that platforms that will go to great lengths to enforce this will become an RL playground for some devs to train their chatbots.
Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans
#285All 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…
According to Citizens United corporations have free speech. LLMs are made by corporations. Are LLMs entitled to free speech?
Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans
#286What a welcome post. The whole reason I come here is to get thoughtful input from smart people, and not what I could get myself from an LLM. While we are at it; Think your own thoughts as well :) I know how easy it is to "let it come up with a first draft" and not spend the real effort of thinking for yourself on questions, but you'll find it's a road to perdition if you let yourself slip into the habit. Thanks to all the humans still here!!
Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans
#287I believe the issue of proving who is and who isn't really human on the Internet will be a really important issue in the coming years, especially without sacrificing people's right to privacy and anonymity in the process.
I think we're going to have to make some choices.
A completely anonymous stranger has no way to prove that they're human that can't be imitated by an AI. We've even seen that, in some cases, AIs can look more human to humans than real humans do.
The only solution I can think of to that problem is some sort of provenance system. Even before AI, if some random person told me a thing, I'd ignore them; If my most trusted friend told me something, I'd believe them.
We're going to need a digital equivalent. If I see a post/article/comment I need my tech to automatically check the author and rank it based on their position in my trust network. I don't necessarily need to know their identity, but I do need to know their identity relative to me.
Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans
#288All 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…
I had a couple of experiences where I suspected I was hearing LLM-generated/edited text being read aloud. It was at two different webinars about that were about roadmaps or case studies about some products that I use. It was a bit uncanny because I could detect the stylistic patterns ("It's not X, it's Y" and "No X, no Y, just Z"), but it was kind of jarring to see them spoken by a person on a video call. It makes me think this kind of pattern might be engaging, but for a lot of people, it now sticks out for the wrong reasons.
Once LLM generated speech or content start getting into the live answers of Q&A sessions, that would be sad. I know some people try to get through interviews, but I think that might be a bit harder to not detect.
Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans
#289"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 saw a similar conversation somewhere about some project saying they don't allow AI generated code. It was asked that if "AI Generated Code" is just code suggested to you by a computer program, where does using the code that your IDE suggests in a dropdown? That's been around for decades. Is it LLM or "Gen AI" specific? If so, what specific aspect of that makes one use case good and one use case bad and what exactly…
Projects cannot allow AI generated code if they require everything to have a clear author, with a copyright notice and license.
IDE code suggestions come from the database of information built about your code base, like what classes have what methods. Each such suggestion is a derived work of the thing being worked on.
Re: Don't post generated/AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans
#290The only question is is the entity interesting and/or correct. Those properties are in the eye of the beholder. If they're human or not is beside the point. After all, no one knows I'm a dog.
No, those properties are tied to the state of mind and experiences of the human, dog, or LLM behind any given comment. When someone posts: > You could use Redis for that, sure, I've run it and it wasn't as hard as some people seem to fear, but in hindsight I'd prefer some good hardware and a Postgres server: that can scale to several million daily users with your workload, and is much easier to design around at this…
> then the beholder is trusting not just the correctness of that one sentence but all of the experiences and insights from the author.
This implies they know the author and can trust them. If they don't know the author then there is no trust to break and they are only relying on the collective intelligence which could be reflected by the AI.
That is to say that trusting a known human author is very different from trusting any human author and trusting any human author is not that much different from trusting an AI.