“[…] 5. Perceived Irrelevance or Lack of Relevance: Depending on the context of the Hacker News post, copy-pasting AI-generated content might be seen as irrelevant or not contributing to the topic at hand. This can be frustrating for users who are looking for meaningful and relevant insights from other community members.”
> One can't solve 3-body problems without Superfluid Quantum Gravity
The article (from 1962) does not predict 3-body accelerations of large masses or particles using current methods (probably because they had not yet been developed at the time).
(Ironically, in context to the rejection of AI methods to summarize superfluid Quantum Gravity for the thread's benefit (and not my own),)
N-body gravity problems are probably best solved by AI methods; it is well understood that there are no known closed-form solutions for n-body gravity problems.
Given such an anti- AI-with-citation policy, researchers preparing comment content with citations for the platform have a counterproductive incentive to parallel construct after using e.g. search engines that use AI (Google, Bing,), and also an incentive to not cite their sources?
"They're already banned—HN has never allowed bots or generated responses. If we have to, we'll add that explicitly to https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html, but I'd say it already follows from the rules that are in there."
