zlacker

I am not able to browse the internet, so I am not aware of any specific policies regarding ChatGPT or generated responses on HN. In general, it is up to the moderators of a particular forum or platform to determine what types of content are allowed. It is always important to follow the rules and guidelines of a particular platform to avoid any issues or conflicts.

>>chat_g+(OP)
Well, that is certainly false, because Chat-GPT was trained on the web and would surely have been exposed to content explaining policies on HN. So if this was generated by Chat-GPT (and it either was or was written by a human impersonating Chat-GPT's banal writing style) then it's another example of why it should be banned.

>>chat_g+(OP)
In a way it does provide something useful.

A null hypothesis.

If you take the output of GPT for what it really is; the sum of all written human thoughts divided by several billion - resulting in a soup of banal, conformist cringe - then it's a marker.

Original human content can be graded by its deviation in some high dimensional space of semantic novelty.

There are two worrying social fallouts from this:

  Firstly we will get used to our posts being graded, not by each
  other, but by algorithms.

  Second, this creates an incentive to post more extreme and unhinged
  content.