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

LLM policy?

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 145 posts

Re: LLM policy?

#61

Post by mh- »

plufz wrote: post #56
SoftTalker wrote: post #4

I think everything has a growing problem with LLM/AI generated content. Emails, blog posts, news articles, research papers, grant applications, business proposals, music, art, pretty much everything you can think of. There’s already more human produced content in the world than anyone could ever hope to consume, we don’t need more from AI.

I personally am more afraid of not the exact opposite, but more that AI will cause us to have too little content more than we will have too much. I just notice with myself how much less I’m using Wikipedia or forums, and get my answers from OpenAI or Antrophic. From what I remember it’s a over 20% drop in Wikipedia traffic from monthly 2022 vs 2025.

I don't think that's fully attributable to LLMs.

Attention spans for long-form content at are at all-time lows, judging by the metrics I've seen from various platforms across different media types.

Re: LLM policy?

#63

Post by 8organicbits »

plufz wrote: post #56
SoftTalker wrote: post #4

I think everything has a growing problem with LLM/AI generated content. Emails, blog posts, news articles, research papers, grant applications, business proposals, music, art, pretty much everything you can think of. There’s already more human produced content in the world than anyone could ever hope to consume, we don’t need more from AI.

I personally am more afraid of not the exact opposite, but more that AI will cause us to have too little content more than we will have too much. I just notice with myself how much less I’m using Wikipedia or forums, and get my answers from OpenAI or Antrophic. From what I remember it’s a over 20% drop in Wikipedia traffic from monthly 2022 vs 2025.

Primary sources will always exist as the content needs to come from somewhere. Personally, I shy away from ChatGPT answers for the same reason I avoid Wikipedia: you've got to find authoritative information to get reliable answers. I wonder if people who use LLMs don't care about accuracy, or don't know about sourcing?

Re: LLM policy?

#65

Post by komali2 »

ddxv wrote: post #25

I've seen an interesting politically motivated one. It didn't appear to be a bot, just a user from China: https://github.com/umami-software/umami/pull/3678 The goal is "Taiwan" -> "Taiwan, Province of China" but via the premise of updating to UN ISO standards, which of course does not allow Taiwan. The comment after was interesting with how reasonable it sounds: "This is the technical specification of the ISO 3166-1…

One of these days I need to make a bot that scans FOSS repos for this kind of little pink nonsense behavior.

The insecurity of wanting to call a place "country name, province of different country name" should alone be mocked. Imagine, "Ukraine, province of Russia," or "India, colony of The United Kingdom." Absurd on its face.

Re: LLM policy?

#66

Post by denmark1 »

andrewflnr wrote: post #40
Gigablah wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans are far more effective at producing garbage than LLMs will ever be :)

They're really not, though. Creating garbage is the one ability at which LLMs are unarguably superhuman.

I think the opposite. LLMs do good work if you know what you’re doing across the board. Having 20 years experience writing code, it’s made things even better for me and even more fun. To those hating, they probably never wrote a system in their life.

Re: LLM policy?

#67

Post by troupo »

lynx97 wrote: post #46
0xfffafaCrash wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There’s already more human produced content in the world than anyone could ever hope to consume, we don’t need more from AI. Even if you think the harms of AI/machine generated content outweigh the good, this is not a winning argument. People don’t just consume arbitrary content for the sake of consuming any existing content. That’s rarely the point of it. People look for all kinds of things that don’t exist yet —…

Just happened to me yesterday. I realized I'd really like to watch a long-form video on Huygens Clock. Something between a short (god damnit) and Quicksilver. Thought there must be something detailed. Nope, at least Youtube let me down. Or the search algo, who knows. Since they removed the "20+ minutes" button it has become basically useless to search on YT.

> Since they removed the "20+ minutes" button it has become basically useless to search on YT.

A few days ago I definitely got into an A/B test where the search results were:

- 5 shorts one under another

- new section with one or two videos and one or two shorts

- new section with five or more shorts in a horizontal layout

- new section with videos of which 20-30% were shorts

It's insane

Re: LLM policy?

#68

Post by Aloisius »

bsder wrote: post #22

A much bigger problem is that when an AI/LLM coughs up code, you have absolutely no idea what the copyright or license is.

I assume any LLM contributions are uncopyrightable at best or copyright infringement at worst. Either way, I don't own the copyright.

In order to avoid a potential future where I lose the copyright due to being unable to show a substantial portion is human authored, I try to keep track of what is AI authored and what is human authored.

From a copyright perspective, right now accepting LLM contributions feels like playing with fire, at least for closed source projects.

Re: LLM policy?

#69

Post by a2128 »

I think AI generated issues and pull requests may lead to the death of GitHub as the place for open-source projects. As Microsoft is hell-bent on shoving easy AI buttons in every interface including GitHub, and as more people try to pad their GitHub profile for their resume, the burden for open-source projects to filter the low-quality spam may grow immense and it may become worth to just switch to Codeberg or other platforms. Some LLM use will inevitably leak into these other platforms but the relatively high barrier (no built-in AI buttons), effective moderation banning obvious violators, and reduced usefulness for resume padding would make it negligible I think.

Re: LLM policy?

#70

Post by QuiDortDine »

dropbox_miner wrote: post #2

There seems to be a bot that routinely creates huge LLM generated Issues on runc github: https://github.com/containerd/containerd/issues/12496 And honestly, its becoming annoying

Is there a way to ban specific users in your GitHub project?

(I prefer GitLab, I'm sure if it had projects that are as popular it would be similarly inundated.)

Post reply on HN