Is this sustainable? • Hacker News Board

Re: Is this sustainable?

#101

Post by Gomotono » Sat, May 30, 2026, 8:21 AM UTC

r_lee wrote: post #100

Gomotono wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is wrong? I do not mind at all that someone creates an AI Image to decorate a blog article. I'm also not directly offended if someone is using an LLM to write text. And i find it a valid argument, that people who post on HN and get enough votes for content, people read and liked, that this can be enough as a filter or quality gate.

HN does not filter content before you read it, there's regularly a bunch of AI slop articles/blogs/ads that get to the front page for whatever reason

You have a new tap on top of hn and it has to be voted up to reach the normal page.

In another comment they mention that there is some kind of mechanism of sometimes showing new in the overview. But besides that, its filtered

Re: Is this sustainable?

#102

Post by kcartlidge » Sun, May 31, 2026, 9:08 AM UTC

Arainach wrote: post #67

I agree with the content, but... "1-2-1"? From context, this seems to be "1 to 1" or "1:1", but the numeral 2 would never make sense. Am I missing something?

A 1-2-1 in this context likely refers to the 1-2-1 sessions some leads/managers have on a regular basis with each of their reports. One on one catch-ups on how they're doing.

Re: Is this sustainable?

#103

Post by carlosjobim » Sun, May 31, 2026, 3:32 PM UTC

skydhash wrote: post #68

carlosjobim wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever seen a police report? They are the people who write most reports of any profession, and usually they are full of grammar and spelling mistakes. But I understand that the majority of hackers here think that spelling mistakes in a report means that somebody is bad at their job as a police officer. And I know that a good portion of hackers here think that a suspect should have all charges dismissed if a po…

Nope. Doing a syntax error in a programming language is the equivalent of filing the wrong form or filing the form incorrectly. Like if the question was “Suspect Height” and you put “green”. Indentation rule are about scoping, You need a delimiter to mark end of a statements, and quoting often have to do with value type and interpolation. They’re not merely visual markers. Messing them up is the equivalent of answeri…

> Yep writing code is filing a form

No it isn't anymore. Because of AI coding agents, all that is taken care of by the robot, and people can focus on other stuff.

> Like if the question was “Suspect Height” and you put “green”.

And any person reading the report can still make sense of mistakes. Such as if the answers are switched between two lines. But hackers would demand that the suspect has to go free because of a typo.

Thankfully the AIs are not anything like rule-obsessing hackers, and will understand exactly what you mean even if you made a typo or mistake somewhere.

At the time where machines have finally started behaving more human, a huge number of people insist on wasting their precious time on earth by selecting to have robot minds.

Re: Is this sustainable?

#104

Post by Arainach » Sun, May 31, 2026, 5:22 PM UTC

kcartlidge wrote: post #102

Arainach wrote: post #67

I agree with the content, but... "1-2-1"? From context, this seems to be "1 to 1" or "1:1", but the numeral 2 would never make sense. Am I missing something?

A 1-2-1 in this context likely refers to the 1-2-1 sessions some leads/managers have on a regular basis with each of their reports. One on one catch-ups on how they're doing.

Yes, that's what I said, but there's no "2" in there. It's "one to one", not "one two one"

Re: Is this sustainable?

#105

Post by tomjakubowski » Tue, Jun 02, 2026, 6:47 PM UTC

mswphd wrote: post #85

neuroblaster wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unpredictable positive events usually just don't get attention. Something good just happened, okay, that's good. People just don't pay attention. Technically black swan might not be negative, but for all practical reasons, "black swan event" is what people call impactful unpredictable negative events and they expect those events to be negative. In other words, it is a synonym for "a disaster" of sorts, only "economic…

they do get attention, but generally people don't dwell on how unpredictable they were. Operation Warp Speed got covid vaccines out within ~1 year. Initial predictions were more in the >= 5 years time range. Fast covid vaccines were very much a "white swan" event, but reporting around it wasn't "this is so unlikely to have worked out" etc.

An unexpected event being "good" doesn't make it a "white swan". The historical context for black swans is that Europeans had only ever seen white swans, which were native to the Old World, and so there was assumption among them that all swans were white: the black swan in European culture was a symbol for something impossible. That is, until they made contact with Australia, and first encountered the black swan. One who had derived from induction the mistaken assumption that all swans were white was proven wrong with a single observation, and the European models and cultural symbols had to be updated.

https://theconversation.com/friday-essay-a-rare-bird-how-eur...

An observation consistent with past observations would be a "white swan".