3 ms·

"Here on HN and all other platforms those that have a few such people have an advantage. How do you think every single piece of content they post gets massive u

"Here on HN and all other platforms those that have a few such people have an advantage. How do you think every single piece of content they post gets massive upvotes and likes?" Yeah, this is the key point. Voting rings etc. exists also here, but they are against the rules and are spotted and banned regulary. So in general the pieces with the most upvotes are those where the majority of REAL people thinks they are interesting, like it should be. The same with genuine blogs, forums etc., those with INTERESTING content gets to the top. But if I encounter a blog with artificial engagement, I will just go away. "Having said that… you also totally ignored my request to answer point by point the numbered points." And why do you think I would feel obliged to do so, when you ignore my concrete criticism? You are creating lots of text defending the "ethics" of your buisness model, when in truth your buisness models depends on you keeping your twisted sense of ethics, no thank you to such a discussion. Because you are not discussing in good faith. "If ChatGPT generates an essay for you, or a homework assignment, that IS fake, sorry" Because I was not talking about homework, but real code I write. That code works in the real world. Real value. And the buisness description describes a real product and the content came from a real human, just the structuring of the words came with help. Framing this as cheating, so your own very shaddy things comes of as better, is just not something I will engage with any further.

EGreg 4y ago
I know, you were trying very hard to list a tiny, tiny subset of activities people do with OpenAI’s APIs, so as to steer clear of the vast majority of use cases where you would have to concede the point. And you again avoided answering my points. At this point it’s rather clear you’re not arguing in good faith. Totally disagree that it is because of how good the content is. I posted the same exact thing twice - one time it got 0 or 1 upvotes and the other time it got 150 and made the front page! Same exact link. Rather, it is survivorship bias. You see the stuff thag made it. The celebrities on Twitter have entire departments working to make sure their content has likes and comments. In fact a decade ago I worked in digital agencies thag made Facebook apps and they all bought 50,000 non-organic “likes” to bootstrap the campaign / app. Nearly everyone who is successful does it. Practically any channel or forum that you’ve ever heard of got that way because they started off with some dedicated people / team members hanging out there every day and not behaving “organically”. Even worse, every very successful forum or celebrity got there by leveraging the existing social capital of some network or organization. Most of it is NOT organic at ALL. I am surprised that you would be so naive to think that putting up a forum with no comments is all you need to do to become a well-trafficked forum. PS: I brought up your concerns, which I share regarding the vast majority of AI applications, in a Discuss HN post. It got 14 upvotes and 7 comments in a few minutes, and then was flagged. Two hours later it was unflagged but by that time all momentum has cooled. I can assure you that far larger business models are at stake and far larger interests do not want this conversation to happen, than my little app. If you actually cared about this issue, you’d care about seeing it everywhere it exists: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35688266 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35688266

EGreg 4y ago

I know, you were trying very hard to list a tiny, tiny subset of activities people do with OpenAI’s APIs, so as to steer clear of the vast majority of use cases where you would have to concede the point. And you again avoided answering my points. At this point it’s rather clear you’re not arguing in good faith. Totally disagree that it is because of how good the content is. I posted the same exact thing twice - one time it got 0 or 1 upvotes and the other time it got 150 and made the front page! Same exact link. Rather, it is survivorship bias. You see the stuff thag made it. The celebrities on Twitter have entire departments working to make sure their content has likes and comments. In fact a decade ago I worked in digital agencies thag made Facebook apps and they all bought 50,000 non-organic “likes” to bootstrap the campaign / app. Nearly everyone who is successful does it. Practically any channel or forum that you’ve ever heard of got that way because they started off with some dedicated people / team members hanging out there every day and not behaving “organically”. Even worse, every very successful forum or celebrity got there by leveraging the existing social capital of some network or organization. Most of it is NOT organic at ALL. I am surprised that you would be so naive to think that putting up a forum with no comments is all you need to do to become a well-trafficked forum. PS: I brought up your concerns, which I share regarding the vast majority of AI applications, in a Discuss HN post. It got 14 upvotes and 7 comments in a few minutes, and then was flagged. Two hours later it was unflagged but by that time all momentum has cooled. I can assure you that far larger business models are at stake and far larger interests do not want this conversation to happen, than my little app. If you actually cared about this issue, you’d care about seeing it everywhere it exists: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35688266 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35688266