undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjbstack5mo ago0 comments

Isn't it then more reasonable to have a policy that "people who submit low quality PRs will be banned"? Target the actual problem rather than an unreliable proxy of the problem.

LLM-generated code can be high quality just as human-generated code can be low quality.

Also, having a "no recourse" policy is a bit hostile to your community. There will no doubt be people who get flagged as using LLMs when they didn't and denying them even a chance to defend themselves is harsh.

0 comments

Ekaros5mo ago

Banning LLMs can result in shorter arguments. "Low quality" is overly subjective and will probably take a lot of time to argue about. And then the possible outrage if it is taken to social media.

jbstackOP5mo ago

> Banning LLMs can result in shorter argument

Can it really? "You submitted LLM-generated contributions" is also highly subjective. Arguably more so since you can't ever really be sure if somethingi s AI generated while with quality issues there are concrete things you can point to (e.g. it the code simply doesn't work, doesn't meet the contributor guidelines, uses obvious anti-patterns etc.).

63stack5mo ago

If you rtfa, you will find it's actually the other way around. The linked PR from the AI has "concrete things you can point to" like "the code simply doesn't work".

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse