Laughing at the idea of distillation being bad is exactly as cliche/flamebaity as complaining that your model got distilled.

No more, no less.

> it has also become an entirely cliché response

To be fair, that's also the case for the link itself we're discussing.

I think then we should ban these sorts of posts about the allegation of distillation, since being able to post the story but then warning accounts with comments about the hypocrisy, is not the correct way to go about it.

In the controversy over AI and intellectual property rights, the notion of asymmetrical enforcement of those rights is presently an active and dynamic rhetorical position. If you suppress responses espousing that position, how am I to judge the breadth of the position in the debate?

When I see a lot of the responses, even cliche ones, it tells me people are passionate about the issue. Right now I think that's an interesting piece of information.

I agree in the abstract, but perhaps the way to avoid generic responses is to disallow (or segment) generic submissions. This website is no longer HN, it should be renamed AIN. There is only so much to say about the subject, and if cliché submissions keep getting accepted and upvoted and shoved to every visitor without a way to avoid them (barring leaving the website entirely), then people will eventually gravitate to the same responses. If your neighbours play loud music every night, they don’t get to complain that everyone is always mentioning the loud music to them.

You are a fantastic moderator, but there’s only so much even you can do. If nothing changes about the website, the problem will only get worse. I warned years ago that this would happen, the signs were on the wall immediately.

You just told on yourself big time about being a lapdog for the US Feds. Easily one of the worst moderation decisions you’ve ever made and that’s impressive given your track record.