I'm also not averse to pasting Claude's output sometimes, with clear attribution...

fsloth · 2026-03-11T20:06:28 1773259588

"It's not that different from pasting a quote from Wikipedia"

Claude's output it _totally different_ from pasting a quote from Wikipedia.

The latter has the potential to be edited and reviewed by global subject experts.

Claude's output totally depends on what priors you gave it and while you can have high confidence in the context no third party should have.

throw310822 · 2026-03-11T20:14:30 1773260070

Indeed, but we know this, right? When it's relevant, the prompt should also be included.

fsloth · 2026-03-11T20:24:07 1773260647

No, that’s not how LLM:s work. Single prompt does not make it any better. Please focus on interesting humans comments.

If you feel like it sure chat with claude to build your insight. Then write what you think _yourself_.

If you want to introduce references use urls to non-ai generated contexts.

I means as a HN protocol.

HN is supposed to be interesting.

LLM output specifically is not interesting because everyone else can generate roughly the same output.

bondarchuk · 2026-03-11T20:06:30 1773259590

Yes it is different and I don't want to read it.

throw310822 · 2026-03-11T20:11:53 1773259913

Yes exactly, when it's clearly attributed you can skip it. It's a tool, it can be used to process and analyse large amounts of information. Not different from Excel.

bondarchuk · 2026-03-11T20:19:38 1773260378

No thanks. Thankfully there is a policy against it now so I don't even have to convince you.