3 ms·

“AI generated” is already a slur.

dang 3mo ago
It's sometimes used that way, sometimes a fact, and sometimes both. It's all unclear because we're still in the early stages of this working itself out.
- minimaxir 3mo ago
  And then there's clanker (which has fortunately tapered off a bit): https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=clanker&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
  - dang 3mo ago
    This is a nested-enough subthread that I can say whatever I want because no one will ever link to it because if they do no one will care. The class of comments you're talking about—not just ones that say "clanker" literally but the more general category—is particle-wave undecidable right now. If the commenter is right—i.e. if the commenter they are castigating actually did post LLM-generated text—then it's a community immune system response. If the commenter is wrong—i.e. they are castigating a sincere human and hauling them to court on false charges—then it's the kind of attack that we tell people not to post here. They can't know for sure whether what they're saying is true or false, and we can't know for sure how we should moderate it. Both questions depend on information that is unavailable. This is what I mean when I say that the whole question is in a chaotic state right now, and it's too soon to know which way it will stabilize.
    - minimaxir 3mo ago
      That's a fair response.
    - not-a-llm 3mo ago
      and then some articles will have maybe a small section, 10% of it, LLM generated. And the it really is a superposition of LLM/human written, and flaggable/unflaggable
      - dang 3mo ago
        It's true! Or maybe 20% or 60% or 80%.
    - bluefirebrand 3mo ago
      I don't envy the position you're in. I think the decision to ban AI submissions is a good one, but ultimately it's going to create this conflict for some time, maybe a really long time until things stabilize around AI in the broader culture I hope eventually AI usage does become a taboo, at least in some fields. Creative fields should be for creative humans, not people who can't even publish an article without the help of an LLM
      - dang 3mo ago
        Ok, but we're not talking about all AI usage. We're talking about using AI to process text that gets published for others to read. There are tons of ways to use AI that don't intersect with that.
        bluefirebrand 3mo ago
        I'm thinking about it more as a microcosm of how norms will form around AI usage If it becomes very normal and expected that people just let LLMs speak for them online using their voice, then I don't think any kind of online community has a hope of actually keeping that behavior at bay long-term For people like me that means the end of online communication entirely, most likely. I don't want to talk to people's LLMs My hope is there's some broader cultural taboos around AI usage for communication purposes at least.

dang 3mo ago

It's sometimes used that way, sometimes a fact, and sometimes both. It's all unclear because we're still in the early stages of this working itself out.

minimaxir 3mo ago
And then there's clanker (which has fortunately tapered off a bit): https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=clanker&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
- dang 3mo ago
  This is a nested-enough subthread that I can say whatever I want because no one will ever link to it because if they do no one will care. The class of comments you're talking about—not just ones that say "clanker" literally but the more general category—is particle-wave undecidable right now. If the commenter is right—i.e. if the commenter they are castigating actually did post LLM-generated text—then it's a community immune system response. If the commenter is wrong—i.e. they are castigating a sincere human and hauling them to court on false charges—then it's the kind of attack that we tell people not to post here. They can't know for sure whether what they're saying is true or false, and we can't know for sure how we should moderate it. Both questions depend on information that is unavailable. This is what I mean when I say that the whole question is in a chaotic state right now, and it's too soon to know which way it will stabilize.
  - minimaxir 3mo ago
    That's a fair response.
  - not-a-llm 3mo ago
    and then some articles will have maybe a small section, 10% of it, LLM generated. And the it really is a superposition of LLM/human written, and flaggable/unflaggable
    - dang 3mo ago
      It's true! Or maybe 20% or 60% or 80%.
  - bluefirebrand 3mo ago
    I don't envy the position you're in. I think the decision to ban AI submissions is a good one, but ultimately it's going to create this conflict for some time, maybe a really long time until things stabilize around AI in the broader culture I hope eventually AI usage does become a taboo, at least in some fields. Creative fields should be for creative humans, not people who can't even publish an article without the help of an LLM
    - dang 3mo ago
      Ok, but we're not talking about all AI usage. We're talking about using AI to process text that gets published for others to read. There are tons of ways to use AI that don't intersect with that.
      - bluefirebrand 3mo ago
        I'm thinking about it more as a microcosm of how norms will form around AI usage If it becomes very normal and expected that people just let LLMs speak for them online using their voice, then I don't think any kind of online community has a hope of actually keeping that behavior at bay long-term For people like me that means the end of online communication entirely, most likely. I don't want to talk to people's LLMs My hope is there's some broader cultural taboos around AI usage for communication purposes at least.