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

761–770 of 1001 posts

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

#761

Post by drittich »

dang wrote: post #755
uni_baconcat wrote: post #754

For quite a while, I like use LLM to refine and fix my grammar issue, but my colleagues and professors reminds me that it was way too obvious. They said they can tolerate some mistakes in my words, but no tolerance for AI generated content.

Thanks for putting this so nicely! We'd much rather hear you in your own voice, and the cost of a few mistakes is far less than the cost of losing that. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Voice is everything. Don't relinquish the best part of yourself.

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

#762

Post by GMoromisato »

js8 wrote: post #743
GMoromisato wrote: post #272

I'm here to read what actual humans think. If I wanted to read what an LLM thinks, I could just ask it. But here's where it gets tricky: Do I prefer low-effort, off-the-top-of-my-head reactions, as long as it is human? Or do I want an insightful, well-thought-out response, even if it is LLM-enhanced? Am I here to read authentic humans because I value authenticity for its own sake (like preferring Champagne instead of…

I agree there is a dichotomy. I personally think AIs are better debaters than humans, at the very least in their ability to make less logical mistakes and have wider knowledge. I would suggest everyone should run their thoughts through an AI to get a constructive critique, it would certainly reduce lot of time wasted. And I find the decision to "ban" AI slightly ironic, when HN has a disdain (unlike its predecessor S…

There are huge advantages to AI-moderation. TBD what the unintended consequences are. But I think it's worth trying.

I believe banning AI is a temporary solution. Even today it is very hard to tell human from AI. In the future it will be impossible. We are in the Philip Dick future of "Do Androids Dream" (the book, not the movie). Does it matter if we can't tell human from AI? The book proposes that how we feel about the piece we're reading is the only thing that matter. How the piece got created is irrelevant.

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

#763

Post by nobody9999 »

Supermancho wrote: post #716

I use AI for the elements I feel are weak or unclear in the transcription. Sometimes I copy-paste a paragraph into ChatGPT or whatever, to ensure my (aging) thoughts are being communicated in a crystal clear manner. I cannot always point out why I think they are unclear or jumbled. I don't feel this is an imposition on others. I think it's the opposite. It enhances signal by reducing nitpicking, spelling/grammar erro…

>I use AI for the elements I feel are weak or unclear in the transcription. Sometimes I copy-paste a paragraph into ChatGPT or whatever, to ensure my (aging) thoughts are being communicated in a crystal clear manner. I cannot always point out why I think they are unclear or jumbled.

Your point is well taken.[0]

Personally, I take a different approach. I use a 5 minute delay for comments on HN so I can look at the post after I submit it, but before anyone else sees it.

This gives me the opportunity to read over my comment and the comment to which I've replied to make sure my prose is decent, my point is clear and any typos or other inaccuracies can be corrected.

I don't use LLMs as an editor as I've found that I'm probably a better editor than the average internet user, which is what LLMs represent.

Perhaps that's arrogant of me, but I'm much more comfortable standing by what I write when it's me writing and editing.

[0] Please note that this is most certainly not a swipe at you or anyone else who uses LLMs as an editor. I just have a different perspective which pushes me in a different direction.

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

#764

Post by reducesuffering »

This being 3 years late is indicative of how far HN is falling behind the curve. Do not expect much convo here around software technology to be skating towards the puck. It is increasingly reactive and lagging the frontier, which is a shame from its former self.

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

#766

Post by ModernMech »

caditinpiscinam wrote: post #745

We've all heard the phrase "the sum of all human knowledge". I've been feeling more and more that generative AI represents the average of all human knowledge. Which has its place. But a future in which all thought and creativity is averaged away is a bleak one. It's the heat death of thought.

The soft gaussian blur of all human knowledge.

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

#767

Post by ModernMech »

jedberg wrote: post #359

I'm absolutely 100% for this policy. My only caution is that good writers and LLMs look very similar, because LLMs were trained on a corpus of good writers. Good writers use semicolons and em-dashes. Sometimes we used bulleted lists or Oxford commas. So we should make sure to follow that other HN rule, and assume the person on the other end is a good faith actor, and be cautious about accusing someone of using AI. (I…

I find that most AI writing reads like ad copy to me. The presence of semicolons or em-dashes say nothing either way.

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

#768

Post by agrajag »

sholladay wrote: post #765

I assume that the inclusion of some AI generated content is ok, such as when discussing the performance of different models?

I’m sure it would be fine if it was quoted, but it seems obvious the policy is to not represent AI generated content as human

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

#769

Post by ninjagoo »

kccqzy wrote: post #309
chrisweekly wrote: post #175

I like this guideline, at least in principle. But I have some concerns about suppression of comments from non-native English writers. More selfishly, my personal writing style has significant overlap with so-called "tells" for AI generated prose: things like "it's not X, it's Y", use of em-dashes, a fairly deep vocabulary, and a tendency toward verbosity (which I'm striving to curb). It'd be ironic if I start getting…

Almost the entirety of the technology world is English-native. That ship has sailed a long time ago. One can’t learn about any new technology without English, whether it’s a new algorithm, a new library, or a new SaaS service. I don’t think HN should be that exception. Just learn English. (English isn’t my first language either, but then I look back at my parents forcing me to learn English from a young age and reall…

> Almost the entirety of the technology world is English-native.

I wonder if the Chinese might have to say something about that [1]: 33% of 2 million funded studies were in Chinese. I posit that as China strengthens and no longer feels the need to be admired internationally, that declining % will reverse.

Another example is of the Huawei Matebook Fold [2]. It's an interesting dual-screen PC Laptop (?) that I saw in a YouTube video from India, but the product page doesn't even come up in Google search results. Its product page is in Chinese, and the only way to find it seems to be through the wiki page [3].

[1] https://academic.oup.com/rev/article-abstract/doi/10.1093/re...

[2] https://consumer.huawei.com/cn/harmonyos-computer/matebook-f...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MateBook_Fold

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

#770

Post by oblio »

caditinpiscinam wrote: post #745

We've all heard the phrase "the sum of all human knowledge". I've been feeling more and more that generative AI represents the average of all human knowledge. Which has its place. But a future in which all thought and creativity is averaged away is a bleak one. It's the heat death of thought.

> I've been feeling more and more that generative AI represents the average of all human knowledge.

It's literally what it is. Fairly sure that mathematically it's a fancier regression/prediction so it's a form of average.

Post reply on HN