3 ms·
Wait, so if it’s accurate, interesting, new to most of us, and adjacent to the topic… that’s a bad thing?
by brookst 2y ago
Wait, so if it’s accurate, interesting, new to most of us, and adjacent to the topic… that’s a bad thing?
- tptacek 2y agoIt is if it's LLM-generated; strictly verboten on HN. This doesn't look like that to me though.
- heresie-dabord 2y agoGood y'all, however much I (born human and have all my shots) may have the misfortune to attract downvotes, I'm not a fershlugginer LLM. (Not sure what this says about my social skills, no wonder my dance card is M.T.) I do think that it was an interesting addition to the discussion of giant buglies. I personally had never thought about how predation by birds would have pressured prehistoric insects... and made our feathered friends so specialised and good at what they do. Best human wishes!
- tptacek 2y agoI don't think you are! I was only moved to comment by the implication upthread that an informative LLM-generated comment might be welcome here. But yes, another HN norm is not making insinuations about commenters on threads (if people have concerns, they're meant to email hn@yc about it). And yet another norm is not to drive threads into their own navels with metacommentary, so here's where I should shut up.
- heresie-dabord 2y agoProps to thee, my friend. Maybe I'm the one who should refrain, it's a haywire timeline.
- scyzoryk_xyz 2y agoAnd I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords
- Gud 2y agoIt's generally just barely on topic, generic fluff. Anything similar could have been posted, topic adjacent, without really contributing to the discussion. Remember we are on a discussion forum, not a place to dump data.