←back to thread

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

882 points embedding-shape | 1 comments | 09 Dec 25 16:02 UTC | HN request time: 0.201s | 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
tpxl ◴[09 Dec 25 16:17 UTC] No.46206706[source]▶
I think they should be banned, if there isnt a contribution besides what the llm answered. It's akin to 'I googled this', which is uninteresting.
replies(5): >>46206818 #>>46207071 #>>46207682 #>>46208954 #>>46209066 #
Ekaros ◴[09 Dec 25 16:41 UTC] No.46207071[source]▶
I think "I googled this" can be valid and helpful contribution. For example looking up some statistic or fact or an year. If that is also verified and sanity checked.
replies(3): >>46207184 #>>46207941 #>>46208453 #
1. skywhopper ◴[09 Dec 25 18:20 UTC] No.46208453[source]▶
In that case, the correct post here would be to say “here’s the stat” and cite the actual source (not “I googled it”), and then add some additional commentary.