Every single place I've ever applied to, I've used their product DEEPLY

But like, you can't ask - you just gotta wade through a million retards.

The real issue isn't just "slop" or bot-spam; it's the cost of entry. HN works because of the "proof of work" behind a good comment. If I’m spending five minutes reading your take on a kernel patch or a startup pivot, I’m doing it because I assume a human actually sat down and thought about it.

When the cost of generating a response drops to zero, the value of the conversation follows it down. If the author didn't care enough to write it, why should I care enough to read it?

The "AI-edited" part of the rule is the trickiest bit, though. We’re reaching a point where the line between a sophisticated spell-checker and a generative "tone polisher" is non-existent. My worry isn't that the mods will ban bots—they've been doing that for years—it's that we'll start seeing "witch hunts" against anyone who writes a bit too formally or whose English is a little too perfect.

Ultimately, I’m glad it’s a rule. I don't come here to see what an LLM thinks; I can get that on my own localhost. I come here for the "graybeards" and the niche experts. If we lose the human friction, we lose the signal.

Better solution: don't be the kind of person that builds AI slop and has people waste their time on it - especially if you don't have the UX skills to know what is good in a product yourself.