Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

If you can't understand the article, how do you know the LLM did?

Delete this unverified hallucinated slop. Then delete your HN account.

If people want an LLM summary of an article, they can do it themselves.

All you’re encouraging is for users to not acknowledge when they use an LLM. You’ll get the same stuff added to threads. Even now, humans contribute unverified slop to threads too - have we ever had a way of verifying what someone contributes other than the occasional citation?

A solution might be somewhere in the middle. LLMs aren’t going anywhere, and they will only become more invisible.

Good. The shame is the point. If you're going to rely on an LLM, then take ownership over the words you post under your own account. Just posting "this is what the LLM said" with no other content means they take no responsibility for what they say, but still think they are making a contribution.

"Use it as a tool" is always the line from LLM advocates. Okay. If you used a search engine as a tool to find some source, you don't need to say "I used google to find this," you just present the link as your contribution. You found the source. If it is a bad source, you can't get away blaming the search engine. You fucked up the source.

Same with LLMs. If you actually use it as a tool and not an outsourcing of your own role, then you shouldn't need to disclose. But using it as a tool means more than just typing "summarize this for hackernews" and mindlessly copy pasting. If they summarized, validated, and was confident enough in the summary that they felt they didn't need the "I asked an LLM" disclaimer, then that's a contribution. Maybe it is still wrong. As you say, there is a lot of that on the internet.

So yes, we should be shaming those who admit using it to outsource their role. People who want to make contributions when they are completely unqualified to distinguish between a good and bad contribution will learn to hide their use. Good. People who are both attention addicts needing to always make a contribution and who are now cognitive addicts should live their lives in fear over knowing if what they are saying under their own name will get them ridiculed.