The HN rules need to expand to ban all AI generated posts.
Define "AI generated".
Whole article generation? LLM draft with human finish? Human draft with LLM finish? Is proof reading OK? Or is it permanently tainted the second an LLM touches it?
By that logic, at least one of my articles is 100% AI generated.
> And just like that, lone has a conservative garbage collector. Until next time. Soon I'll write about—
Quoting from the article.
> The Town of Atherton's lawsuit against Caltrain electrification is the clearest case study we have of how a tiny, wealthy minority can hijack a regional public project — and stick everyone else with the bill.
The unnecessary emdash-for-effect is a huge LLM-ism. No human I know uses such a device in writing.
> Here is the short version. In 2012, Caltrain budgeted its electrification project — the backbone of the Peninsula's transit future and a prerequisite for high-speed rail to ever reach San Francisco — at roughly $1.5 billion. By 2017 that number had ballooned to $1.9 billion. In between, the Town of Atherton sued.
"Here's the short version" along with the bolding of the numbers tells us something about the "author's" prompt. He prompted it for a short version, and told it to include those two numbers.
I challenge any commenter to name one time they began a paragraph with the meager "Here's the short version."
> One veto point, closed.
Why is the comma even there? Classic LLM melodrama.