Hacker News Reader

Comment by lelanthran | Hacker News Reader

The problem is not the LLM prose appearing everywhere, it's the legions of AI-boosters appearing in every thread attacking anyone who complains.

Apparently, even though they want to spew AI prose everywhere, they want it read by humans, not by other bots, so when a few holdout places are insisting that prose be human authored they fight very hard against the rule.

View on HN

I don't think I've ever seen someone on HN say that. Many people would say that AI makes them more productive at coding, not that the output is nice to read.

I would say that AI prose is often still a bit iffy, but I would disagree with anyone who would want to argue that this is any indication that AI prose will always be bad in the future.

> I don't think I've ever seen someone on HN say that.

A 5m search got me the following:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49410941

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49411042

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49059571

This thread, in particular, stands out - reader makes the claim that Pangram found that the US constitution was 100% AI generated, when others tried they found 0% (or close to it) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48378191

Those are not that. The first two are people complaining about other people incontinently identifying text as AI, because it's annoying to listen to unreliable hunches and aspersions. The second two are complaining about AI detectors not being very reliable. The claim made in the last one is a casual anecdote about "an AI detector", presumably told because it's amusing. It isn't a vehement statement about how you must accept slop into your life.

Sorry, to me any complaint about people complaining about prose is a vehement statement about accepting AI.

I feel that if one doesn't want to send that message, they shouldn't be attempting to convince others that rejection of AI prose must stop.

Yeah, intentionally or unintentionally there is often at motte-and-bailey fallacy flavor to their arguments. The motte is that it can sometimes be hard to identify AI writing, the baily is that we should accept AI wholesale and stop worrying about AI writing.

i am a big fan of llms and the possibilities they enable. but i also find this type of behavior extremely rude! ai;dr for life. :is-your-human-around: is my preferred emoji for reacting to such behavior

The problem is that the AI commenters ironically want human readers for their generated content.

I feel that if you want humans to read your stuff, those humans insisting that you write your own stuff is not an unreasonable position to take.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com