zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. dang+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-02-03 05:50:05
You're right about one thing: I didn't need to say "state of the art". A system that works at all would be great!

I don't think a confirmation prompt will help because people tune such things out after they've seen them a few times.

replies(2): >>JimDab+v3 >>intend+g6
2. JimDab+v3[view] [source] 2024-02-03 06:43:17
>>dang+(OP)
Even a bad implementation isn’t going to be showing this warning to people often enough to desensitise them. And if they make a habit of ignoring the warning to post flamewar stuff… that’s solved with moderation by a human. The intent is to add friction for knee-jerk low-quality comments, not solve for people who persistently, intentionally post low-quality comments after a warning.
3. intend+g6[view] [source] 2024-02-03 07:38:04
>>dang+(OP)
I hate myself for saying it, because of all of the buzz/hype, but LLMs can assist here.

You get better intent assessment than with NLP/ regex/whatever.

Plus HN is entirely in English, so you never have to worry about lexical resource gaps.

There is no off the shelf solution - afaik. In addition I have no idea how expensive running costs will be.

But something serviceable can be built.

Source: mod /t&s person dealing with these things

[go to top]