Hacker News Reader

Comment by scrumper | Hacker News Reader

Okay that's fair.

I had no issue with the contribution itself, the route summary is helpful.

> And they did well enough by citing that the info came from an LLM.

In terms of acknowledging AI contribution, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. Here it's sidetracked a discussion; but transparency is better than otherwise I suppose. Perhaps it just boils down to taste - and I don't like it.

Anyway, you made me think!

View on HN

You also made me think. I think the problem lies in the nature of “threaded” discussions. The information was useful, but it wasn’t necessarily a “reply” to any particular comment. But, the design here leaves no other choice when adding it. It maybe doesn’t make sense as a top-level comment either. It’s almost like we need to have…side comments? Asides? Like a place to just drop in relevant tidbits and informational helpers rather than a true “comment”. Maybe it’s as simple as having a means to turn off replies to signify that a contribution was an “relevant aside”.

But yes, in a perfectly meta way, I think we’ve both thought more about the nature and design of web comments and information and the implications of LLM-assisted chat ‘augmentation’. (All those AI summaries forced upon us in every site is probably the worse implementation of this!)

With all due respect, you are the one that sidetracked the discussion, not the person that acknowledged AI

Reply on news.ycombinator.com