Hackaday states that writing code with LLMs does not automatically diminish the value of projects. It says its editorial criteria focus on whether a project is noteworthy and inspiring, rather than on whether the code was written by a human or artificial intelligence.
At the same time, the site says that projects making claims contrary to the laws of physics, featuring meaningless circuits, and containing only AI-generated images are on the rise. Hackaday’s AI policy, in place throughout its 22-year publishing history, remains unchanged: Inspiring projects will be selected and shared with readers. It emphasizes that, regardless of how AI is used, what matters is that the “hacks” are original and engaging.
Why it matters
This approach removes the use of artificial intelligence alone as a criterion for rejection, shifting the focus of evaluation to the idea and technical value presented by the project. This means that creators working with LLM support are not excluded from the outset, while readers evaluate the content based on the result rather than the tool used to produce it. However, the increase in claims that do not comply with the laws of physics, meaningless circuits, and projects that produce only images makes the distinction between technical verification and inspiration more important for publishing. Hackaday’s unchanged policy shows that, regardless of how AI is used, selection will be based on editorial evaluation; the open question is how these criteria will be applied in the face of increasing low-quality content.