Label your AI writing as AI writing
The author argues that AI‑generated blog content should be clearly labeled as such. They are comfortable with AI‑produced research reports but expect human opinions in opinion pieces. The piece emphasizes transparency to avoid misleading readers about the source of the content.
- ▪The author requests clear labeling of any AI‑written sections on blogs.
- ▪They are fine with AI conducting research and generating reports for public use.
- ▪They prefer human opinions in opinion pieces, viewing AI opinions as aggregated averages.
- ▪The author uses AI‑generated reports for startup comparisons and labels them to maintain credibility.
Hacker News (AI / LLM) files mainly under ai. We currently carry 3,776 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Story provenance
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | Raymondyxu |
| Canonical URL | https://www.raymondyxu.com/blog/labelYourAIWritingAsAIWriting |
| Publication time | Thu, 06 Aug 2026 00:56:44 +0000 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-08-06T01:05:41.948Z |
| Last seen | 2026-08-06T01:05:41.948Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | None |
| Cluster logic | Not yet clustered, or no peer story found in the clustering window. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
If you have a blog on your website, just fucking tell us which part is AI written. I'm actually fine with people telling the AI to do some research, make a report and putting it on the internet. I enter these blogs or posts presuming things are human written, only to be dissapointed when I see the first em dash. If content is labelled as AI generated at the top, I actually can enjoy it if I feel that the deep research being done does succinctly explain something. On a blog that's titled like an opinion piece, I'm looking for human opinions, not AI opinions. AI opinion pieces are just aggregate averages of other opinions on the internet after all. But! As I run a startup, I do want to generate reports of, for an example, my startup compared to other startups in the space.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Raymondyxu.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Raymondyxu
