←back to thread

Ask HN: Should "I asked $AI, and it said" replies be forbidden in HN guidelines?

882 points embedding-shape | 2 comments | 09 Dec 25 16:02 UTC | HN request time: 0.404s | source

As various LLMs become more and more popular, so does comments with "I asked Gemini, and Gemini said ....".

While the guidelines were written (and iterated on) during a different time, it seems like it might be time to have a discussion about if those sort of comments should be welcomed on HN or not.

Some examples:

- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46164360

- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46200460

- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46080064

Personally, I'm on HN for the human conversation, and large LLM-generated texts just get in the way of reading real text from real humans (assumed, at least).

What do you think? Should responses that basically boil down to "I asked $LLM about $X, and here is what $LLM said:" be allowed on HN, and the guidelines updated to state that people shouldn't critique it (similar to other guidelines currently), or should a new guideline be added to ask people from refrain from copy-pasting large LLM responses into the comments, or something else completely?

Show context
chemotaxis ◴[09 Dec 25 16:16 UTC] No.46206685[source]▶
This wouldn't ban the behavior, just the disclosure of it.
replies(3): >>46206767 #>>46206853 #>>46209276 #
1. xivzgrev ◴[09 Dec 25 16:21 UTC] No.46206767[source]▶
Agreed - in fact these folks are going out of their way to be transparent about it. It's much easier to just take credit for a "smart" answer
replies(1): >>46208116 #
2. muwtyhg ◴[09 Dec 25 17:54 UTC] No.46208116[source]▶
So those folks must be doing it because they think it's helpful, right? They are explicitly trying not to take credit for the words. Do you think, after a ban of these kinds of posts are implemented, that those posters would start hiding their use of AI to create replies, or would they just stop using AI to reply at all?