[lamontcg]

Books and newspapers have had editors for centuries. It is just code review for the written word.

[It looks like MS Word 97 had the ability to detect passive voice as well, so we're talking 30 year old technology there that predates LLMs -- how far down the Butlerian Jihad are we going with this?]

[MeetingsBrowser]

Editors are mostly tasked with maintaining a consistent style and standard.

There is no need for that here beyond maybe spellcheck. Use your own thoughts, voice, and words.

[lamontcg]

I don't personally use AI/LLMs for any informal writing here or on reddit, etc. But I think it is pretty weird to be overly concerned around people, particularly ESL, who use tools to clean up their writing. The only thing I really care about is when someone posts LLM regurgitated information on topics they personally don't know anything about. If the information is coming from the human but the style and tone is being tweaked by a machine to make it more acceptable/receptive and fix the bugs in it, then I don't understand why you're telling me I need to care and gatekeeping it. It also is unlikely to be very detectable, and this thread seems to only serve a performative use for people to get offended about it.

[pseudalopex]

Other tools to clean up writing are allowed. They did not tell you you must care. You told them they must not. The submisson's use was to tell you and others LLM generated tone was not more acceptable.

[lamontcg]

Well good luck detecting it.

[davorak]

If it never gets in the way of the humans communicate it probably won't be an issue. That is the reading I have of the rule and Dang's comments

> HN is for conversation between humans.

If it is enhancing that instead of detracting and wasting peoples time it does not seem to be against the spirt of the rules.

[yellowapple]

Except the letter of the rule makes it verboten even “if it never gets in the way of the humans communicate”.