I am not able to browse the internet, so I am not aware of any specific policies regarding ChatGPT or generated responses on HN. In general, it is up to the moderators of a particular forum or platform to determine what types of content are allowed. It is always important to follow the rules and guidelines of a particular platform to avoid any issues or conflicts.

In a way it does provide something useful.

A null hypothesis.

If you take the output of GPT for what it really is; the sum of all written human thoughts divided by several billion - resulting in a soup of banal, conformist cringe - then it's a marker.

Original human content can be graded by its deviation in some high dimensional space of semantic novelty.

There are two worrying social fallouts from this:

  Firstly we will get used to our posts being graded, not by each
  other, but by algorithms.

  Second, this creates an incentive to post more extreme and unhinged
  content.

Well, that is certainly false, because Chat-GPT was trained on the web and would surely have been exposed to content explaining policies on HN. So if this was generated by Chat-GPT (and it either was or was written by a human impersonating Chat-GPT's banal writing style) then it's another example of why it should be banned.