[avazhi]

When are we gonna get a rule about AI slop submissions?

"Don't post generated comments or AI-edited comments. HN is for conversation between humans."

Why limit this to comments only? In this case the conversation was literally started by an AI.

At least require people to label submissions as AI-generated and then give users a way to filter that shit out. I don't come to HN to read AI slop.

[tomhow]

These comments from you seem belligerent and entitled. This has no place on HN. If you want to contribute constructively to the way HN runs, great. Start by being respectful to the community and the guidelines. We're hardly going to prioritize the suggestions of people who routinely throw grenades around.

We can't have a blanket rule to ban all AI-generated articles, because we can't review every article that's submitted and make an evaluation about how much it was AI-generated or assisted. If an article is badly written, whether or not it was AI-assisted, it should be flagged.

In this case, yes I can see the LLM-style of the writing, and I'd prefer writers avoided publishing work that with such obvious fingerprints.

But it got few flags on HN, no complaints other than yours and a good discussion, and the quality of the discussion is what matters most on HN.

[lbrito]

Wait, how do you know that? I took a quick look at OPs stuff and it seems human