Hacker News Reader

Comment by jbirnick | Hacker News Reader

I don't understand why this is often portrayed negatively. In general it's important that people can defend their rights, and I find it great that LLMs can help a lot with that. One could introduce page/word/character limits, and note that the other side can use LLMs too to summarize/organize/extract. Overall I think it's great that LLMs now help me to understand and rightfully claim things from insurances, companies, etc.

View on HN

To be fair, the source mentions the upside ("Although improving Service accessibility is beneficial [...]")

Seems like bureaucracy was added as a subtle way to introduce rate limits, and AI is challenging that mechanism.

> Seems like bureaucracy was added as NOT a subtle way to introduce rate limits

some teams get incentives when the total awards go down in a stable, badly run bureaucracy.. this is real

LLMs are a magic machine to turn commons into tragedies.

Great quote.

Good luck trying to get your book published.

Or run an open source repo from community contributions.

>I don't understand why this is often portrayed negatively. In general it's important that people can defend their rights, and I find it great that LLMs can help a lot with that.

Well I thought it was self evident. It’s portrayed negatively because it causes a denial of service. You should view this positively if you want worse access to public benefits.

Imagine if every time someone reached out to you to ask you a question they did a SAR for all of the information you had on them. They’re technically entitled to do that in many jurisdictions, but it probably won’t help with getting the answer to the question. It’s the same problem as drive by AI PRs except the people receiving them aren’t allowed to ignore them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com