I think we can be chill about it. For someone on the sidelines, mildly interested in the topic, an AI summary of the regex might be useful — and the person getting downvotes is saving some of us the time.
"LLM says X" is the new "I Googled it and here's a copy/paste of the top result". It adds literally nothing of value to the discussion.
Unless of course the discussion is specifically about the quality of LLMs - in which case you should be vetting the answer yourself so you can actually say something meaningful about it.
What value does a link to a source that's not held to any standard to be informative do? Seems a waste of everyone's time to me.
However, I also think it's valid to question what it adds to a conversation if someone is quoting it verbatim. Would we be happier if HN was like Quora and automatically added an AI response to everything?
That or I must be a lot more LLM-accepting than most of HN.