Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When did AI take over Hacker News?

zachperk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 245 posts

Re: When did AI take over Hacker News?

#121

Post by reaperducer »

jaredklewis wrote: post #49
camillomiller wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a relevant number of power users that also flag everything that is critical of big tech and won’t fit their frame as well, sending it into oblivion, regardless of the community rules and clear support from other voting members. But also calling that out is seen as negative and not constructive, and there goes any attempt at a discussion.

How do you know who flags submissions?

How do you know who flags submissions?

I have seen people on HN publicly state that they flag anything they don't agree with, regardless of merit.

I guess they use it like some kind of super-down button.

Re: When did AI take over Hacker News?

#122

Post by reaperducer »

throw10920 wrote: post #86
camillomiller wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a relevant number of power users that also flag everything that is critical of big tech and won’t fit their frame as well, sending it into oblivion, regardless of the community rules and clear support from other voting members. But also calling that out is seen as negative and not constructive, and there goes any attempt at a discussion.

Can you point to a set of recent comments that are critical of big tech while also not breaking the guidelines and make good points, and are flagged anyway? All of the anti-big-tech comments I've ever seen that are flagged are flagged because they blatantly break the guidelines and/or are contentless and don't contribute in any meaningful sense aside from trying to incite outrage. And those should be flagged.

Can you point to a set of recent comments that are critical of big tech while also not breaking the guidelines and make good points, and are flagged anyway?

They show up in the HN Active section quite regularly.

And virtually anything even remotely related to Twitter or most Elon Musk-related companies almost instantly get the hook.

Re: When did AI take over Hacker News?

#123

Post by Dylan16807 »

haswell wrote: post #109
Dylan16807 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Questions can be neutral but questioning is probably negative, and criticism is solidly negative in my book. So no I am not doing that. In what world does "criticism" not default to "negative"?

> Questions can be neutral but questioning is probably negative The ethos of HN is to err on the side of assuming good faith and the strongest possible interpretation of other's positions, and to bring curiosity first and foremost. Curiosity often leads to questions. Can you clarify what you mean by distinguishing between "questions" and "questioning"? How or why is one neutral while the other is probably negative? I…

Curiosity is a neutral response, pushback is a negative response. Both can be good things. Shrug.

> Can you clarify what you mean by distinguishing between "questions" and "questioning"

"questioning" more directly implies doubt to me.

Re: When did AI take over Hacker News?

#124

Post by NaOH »

reaperducer wrote: post #122
throw10920 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you point to a set of recent comments that are critical of big tech while also not breaking the guidelines and make good points, and are flagged anyway? All of the anti-big-tech comments I've ever seen that are flagged are flagged because they blatantly break the guidelines and/or are contentless and don't contribute in any meaningful sense aside from trying to incite outrage. And those should be flagged.

Can you point to a set of recent comments that are critical of big tech while also not breaking the guidelines and make good points, and are flagged anyway? They show up in the HN Active section quite regularly. And virtually anything even remotely related to Twitter or most Elon Musk-related companies almost instantly get the hook.

The request was for examples of comments, not article submissions.

Re: When did AI take over Hacker News?

#126

Post by scyzoryk_xyz »

throw10920 wrote: post #95
ryandrake wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird what counts as "negative" on HN. Question something politely? You're being negative. Criticize something? Negative. Describe it in a way someone might interpret badly? Negative. Sometimes it seems like anything that's not breathless, unconditional praise is considered being negative and curmudgeonly. It's turning into a "positive thoughts only" zone.

Part of this is driven by people who have realized that they can undermine others' thinking skills by using the right emotional language. For instance, in a lot of threads on some new technology or idea, one of the top comments is "I'm amazed by the negativity here on HN. This is a cool and even though it's not perfect we should appreciate the effort the author has put in" - where the other toplevel comments are legi…

Part of this is driven by people engaged in repetitive feedback loops. The links offer a kind of rhythm and the responses usually follow a recognizable pattern.

The funny thing about this here audience is that it is made up of the kinds of folks you would see in all those cringey OpenAI videos. I.e. the sort of person who can do this whole technical criticism all day long but wouldn't be able to identify the correct emotional response if it hit them over the head. And that's what we're all here for - to talk shop.

Thing is - we don't actually influence others' thinking with the right emotional language just by leaving an entry behind on HN. We're not engaging in "amigdala-hijacking" to "shut down criticism" when we respond to a comment. There is a bunch of repetitive online cliché's in play here, but it would be a stretch to say that there are these amigdala-hijackers. Intentionally steering the thread and redefining what negativity is.

Re: When did AI take over Hacker News?

#127

Post by Dylan16807 »

OnlineGladiator wrote: post #97
Dylan16807 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Questions can be neutral but questioning is probably negative, and criticism is solidly negative in my book. So no I am not doing that. In what world does "criticism" not default to "negative"?

Have you never heard of constructive criticism? https://i.redd.it/s4pxz4eabxh71.jpg

To perform constructive criticism you need to be able to say that something has flaws. Which is saying something negative.

Re: When did AI take over Hacker News?

#128

Post by Dylan16807 »

layer8 wrote: post #105
Dylan16807 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would generally file questioning and criticism under "negative". Are you interpreting "negative" as a synonym for bad or something?

Questioning and criticism is a normal part of discussing things. Negativity requires more than that, like being flat-out dismissive of what the other is saying.

Being negative on a subject doesn't require anything like being dismissive.

Re: When did AI take over Hacker News?

#129

Post by zenoprax »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #36
ryandrake wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird what counts as "negative" on HN. Question something politely? You're being negative. Criticize something? Negative. Describe it in a way someone might interpret badly? Negative. Sometimes it seems like anything that's not breathless, unconditional praise is considered being negative and curmudgeonly. It's turning into a "positive thoughts only" zone.

This is such a good comment. I have nothing but positive things to say about it. It's amazing!

You're absolutely right! /s

Re: When did AI take over Hacker News?

#130

Post by bondarchuk »

seadan83 wrote: post #117
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am so floored that at least half of this community, usually skeptical to a fault, evangelizes LLMs so ardently. Truly blows my mind. ... > I’m open to them becoming more than a statistical token predictor, and I think it would be really neat to see that happen I'm more shocked that so many people seem unable to come to grips with the fact that something can be a next token predictor and demonstrate intelligence.…

> I'm more shocked that so many people seem unable to come to grips with the fact that something can be a next token predictor and demonstrate intelligence. Except LLMs have not shown much intelligence. Wisdom yes, intelligence no. LLMs are language models, not 'world' models. It's the difference of being wise vs smart. LLMs are very wise as they have effectively memorized the answer to every question humanity has wr…

I think what BoiledCabbage is pointing out is that the fact that it's a next-token-predictor is used as an argument for the thesis that LLMs are not intelligent, and that this is wrong, since being a next-token-predictor is compatible with being intelligent. When mikert89 says "thinking machines have been invented", dgfitz in response strongly implies that for a for thinking machines to exist, they must become "more than a statistical token predictor". Regardless of whether or not thinking machines currently exist, dgfitz argument is wrong and BoiledCabbage is right to point that out.
Post reply on HN