>I think vast majority HN user won't prefer any AI generated comment.
Agreed! At the same time, there's a lot of content on here about AI, including AI-based content generation.
So, if HN users don't like being subjected to AI-generated content, why would they be OK with promoting AI, including foisting AI-based content upon others? Seems unfair, not to mention self-contradictory.
>These comments honestly just mock readers.
I looked through that poster's comment history and they seem to be participating in good faith.
People are also not great at identifying AI-generated content. (There was an experiment about AI-generated graphic art on ACX not too long ago, I assume the situation with text to be no different.)
And there's a style of "normative" English which the language models "know" by default (because they learned it from human-authored content). But nothing prevents humans from still writing in that style, and indeed many people think that this is how they writing should look in order to get their post across. (My parent comment was a joke about how readers do prioritize style over substance, and are pretty bad at identifying substance they don't already have at least some familiarity with.)
So, if that comment turned out to not be GPT-generated, you've just mocked someone for trying to share their thoughts in that way which (in their opinion) would be most accessible to others. How does that help anyone?
checks barometer Well, given we're about 6 levels deep, and on HN of all places... compute compute I guess we'd probably be either at the "recommendations to think in AAVE" or the "recommendations to start studying Russian" :-)))
If poll is taken, I think vast majority HN user won't prefer any AI generated comment.
These comments honestly just mock readers.