Hacker News Reader

Comment by opdahl | Hacker News Reader

Off-topic but this user seems to be using ChatGPT or something similar for almost every single comment. Does Hacker News have a stance on this or is the thinking that it is allowed as long as the content is good?

View on HN

There is indeed a stance, adding autogenerated comments can get you banned: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33945628

I took a look at their profile and I’m not seeing anything that looks auto generated to me.

These all reek of ChatGPT to me:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39876790

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39819576

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39880881

If posts with multiple paragraphs encircling a topic seems suspect, then we're all guilty. Their points are cogent. If they've dressed the arguments in robes of "purple", so be it.

Maybe we need to up our game then. That could very well be mergekit and clever prompting. Their comment history bends in the direction of content engineering and will get less discernible the more accounts are doing it.

Please, these kinds of purple-prosed thesaurus-laden ruminations smack of LLM augmentation - two in the same thread, and neither contributing anything much more than a long winded flowery restatement of the existing state of the discussion:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39876685 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39876634

It doesn’t take an LLM to write long-winded and flowery prose.

Nice new burn, though… “you write like an LLM”.

Is that what we want on these forums, attacking someone’s prose?

never heard "purple-prosed", what's that mean? like rose-tinted?

At least according to https://gptzero.me/ the submissions are AI Generated.

I'm thankful that I'm 40, and not in school anymore. My general writing style would get my work flagged as "AI-generated" more often than not.

I've run my blog posts through those tools in the past and pretty they consistently fail to be considered human-generated.

It's important not to jump to conclusions about how others are participating in discussions, especially based on the content or style of their comments alone. Many users might have a consistent way of expressing themselves, or they may be leveraging various tools and resources to enhance their contributions.

The key focus should always be on the quality and relevance of the content shared.

That doesn't only feel odd, it also is empty prose based on a far-fetched analogy. Apologies to the root commenter if they wrote it themselves, but quality and relevance is lacking here. 99% sure some of their posts are at least heavily augmented.

This comment reads like a GPT-generated comment! When I look at your history, your other comments seem genuine. I’m probably totally wrong, but I do like the idea of using GPT to counter anti-GPT sentiment. :)

I imagine AI is out there defending it's right to exist where we don't pick up on it's pose.

golf clap

Reply on news.ycombinator.com