@paul That's why it's not actually helpful to downvote spam: posts that are -5 don't go away, but they don't show by default on the SF home page. "Hiding" them with downvotes makes it harder for other people to see and flag them.

@esther As I said in a comment to an answer, the new policy requires moderation of AI-generated posts to be done on the exactly the same basis as posts by humans. We're not allowed to judge a post based on whether it is AI-generated except in a vanishingly rare situation. If we evaluate posts equally regardless of whether they're written by a human or an AI, then the original title is accurate: SO Inc now allows AI posts.

In addition to the argument I've given in the comments on the post (that since there's no enforcement allowed, AI-generated posts are effectively allowed), the other way to look at it is that the policy requires that AI-generated posts be judged exactly the same way as human-generated: moderators can take action based on post quality, but cannot (except in vanishingly unlikely situations) take action based simply on the fact that a post is AI-generated.

I agree, my point was more that it's going to be a problem on large sites as well.

I'm not allowed to ask you if this was written by an AI.

As always, the company's biggest concern is Stack Overflow, which is a couple orders of magnitude bigger than any other SE site, and apparently the concern is the number of posts that were being identified as AI and the resulting number of suspensions handed out.

You may not be surprised to learn that moderators were given a chance to provide feedback on the new buttons, but despite several problems being pointed out and suggestions for improvement made, they were rolled out pretty much unchanged.