Comment by sifar
2 days ago
>> I think a useful litmus test for these kinds of stories is: do the people who most actively participate on them believe there's a conversation to be had, with multiple perspectives, not all of which agree with theirs? That's what this site is for.
This would disqualify more than half of AI/LLM/<insert_tech_person> stories. This seems like a cope out. It is our inability as tech people to embrace the discomfort that is not rational and engage with it.
Huge problem on those stories, too! A lot of those threads are dreadful. My point exactly.
Yes, I've been flagging a fair amount of them too.
Although generally I think the un-nuanced AI hype/doom articles are not nearly as damaging as the flood of one-shot LLM projects being presented under "Show HN" with apparently none of the framing text (HN post, project README, responses to feedback) being human-written.
I think Show HN was due an overhaul even before vibecoding jammed it up, but I agree that's an issue too.
2 replies →
My point is that the discrimination to flag one and not the other seems arbitrary. It has nothing to do with promoting/preserving intellectual curiosity etc. We are deluding ourselves by repeating that.
In that we are practicing the very doublethink we criticize in the society.
I flag overheated AI stuff all the time.
2 replies →
And Dang will take action any day now...
What makes you think he isn't? That's a rhetorical question; he and Tom obviously do intervene with those stories.
2 replies →
> Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.
1 reply →