←back to thread

881 points embedding-shape | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.393s | 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
Rebelgecko ◴[] No.46208100[source]
This is not just about banning a source; it is about preserving the core principle of substantive, human-vetted content on HN. Allowing comments that are merely regurgitations of an LLM's generic output—often lacking context, specific experience, or genuine critical thought—treats the community as an outsourced validation layer for machine learning, rather than an ecosystem for expert discussion. It's like allowing a vending machine to contribute to a Michelin-starred chef's tasting menu: the ingredients might be technically edible, but they completely bypass the human skill, critical judgment, and passion that defines the experience. Such low-effort contributions fundamentally violate the "no shallow dismissals" guideline by prioritizing easily manufactured volume over unique human insight, inevitably degrading the platform's high signal-to-noise ratio and displacing valuable commentary from those who have actually put in the work.
replies(2): >>46208339 #>>46209297 #
teach ◴[] No.46209297[source]
slow clap

A tip of the hat for this performance art

replies(1): >>46209969 #
1. UncleEntity ◴[] No.46209969[source]
One has to wonder if this is how the next generation of kids are going to write after being raised exclusively on AI generated content?
replies(1): >>46211440 #
2. WorldPeas ◴[] No.46211440[source]
In this digital world, the core components of writing can feel overwhelming, by leveraging crutches learned by reading hundreds of dead internet comments, the core principles of writing in an ever-shifting landscape can be more crucial than ever.

(written by a human with help from https://aiphrasefinder.com/common-chatgpt-phrases/)