[dredmorbius]

There are AI-detection tools which exist. Even if those won't run against all URLs, using them where possible should provide some utility. HN already penalises sites based on various criteria, and if it takes hand-pasting some examples from a site to find that it is/isn't using AI slop, that's another option.

As to what should be tested: front-page items, possibly even a subset of those (top 10--15 of 30). That's going to be a limited set of items per day, though more than just 30. (I don't know how many items cycle through the front page on a daily basis, though I believe daily submissions as of 2022 were about 1,000/day (<https://web.archive.org/web/20220116193045/https://whaly.io/...>)).

Working this into the HN story-processing lifecycle might be a good call.

I'd much prefer not seeing a bunch of AI slop in submissions, by way of generated output. AI as part of the resarch process I think I could live with.

AI-generated content seems, definitionally, not to be intellectual in nature, and would seem to go against HN's prime directive. It also seems to make HN lose its collective mind, which has long been another mod consideration.