> Yes, and AI won't help here. People will use AI to better break the guidelines.

AI is a general purpose tool. People will use AI for multiple reasons, including yours. I'll wager, though, that your use case is much more challenging to do than mine, and that my use case will dominate in number.

> HN is more like talking than writing.

Says you. Many disagree.

> And LLMs don't help you write well, they help you sound like a clone, which is unwanted.

Patently false on both counts. Sorry, you're cherry picking and not addressing the part of my comment that discusses this.

> Imagine if your friend AI-edited their speech in real-time as they talked to you.

When a conversation is heated (as it occasionally is on HN), I actually would rather he AI-edit in real time - provided that the output reflects what he intended.

> I'll wager, though, that your use case is much more challenging to do than mine, and that my use case will dominate in number.

I don't know how comparatively challenging, I only know your use case is now (fortunately!) against HN rules.

> Patently false on both counts. Sorry, you're cherry picking and not addressing the part of my comment that discusses this.

It's not false. It's one of the major reasons people have come to dislike AI written comments and articles. It all ends up sounding the same.

> When a conversation is heated (as it occasionally is on HN), I actually would rather he AI-edit in real time - provided that the output reflects what he intended.

In real life? Sounds like a fucking dystopia. But everyone is free to choose the hell they want to live in.