logoalt Hacker News

vconnor • today at 11:23 AM • 3 replies • view on HN

Elsewhere in the email thread:

Picking at random a successful and unsuccessful LLM-generated review from the dashboard, the successful review consists of 734 words (~2.5 printed pages) and the unsuccessful review weighs in at a whopping 1,535 words (~5 printed pages). I haven't tried to fully read either report, nor spend brain cycles checking if the LLM output is legitimate or not. I just want to emphasize the many orders of magnitude change in review size that's being generated, and that uploaders may need to spend time trying to review and understand in this new process.

A bit rude to expect people to swallow 5 pages of slop to figure out why review failed.

EDIT: made my comment more constructive, but originally asked if any distro has adopted a hard anti-AI stance.


Replies

BSDobelix • today at 11:32 AM

>>Any distro that have adopted a hard anti-AI stance?

Yes all the BSD's, and i think with the best explanation, since one cannot proof what license the llm's output has, one cannot legally implement the output under the BSD-License.

But what about Linux? They just dont care, they have the money, corporate backing and with that, all the power.

➕ show 1 reply
none_to_remain • today at 11:26 AM

No Linux distro can have a hard anti-AI stance

➕ show 3 replies
znpy • today at 12:02 PM

I’d rather have a detailed explanation of why my contributions are being rejected rather than the complete opposite which is often something along the lines of “no”