29 ms·

If what people here say is right, and AI usage online is growing and accelerating, then by the end of the year, the vast, vast majority articles posted to the i

If what people here say is right, and AI usage online is growing and accelerating, then by the end of the year, the vast, vast majority articles posted to the internet (and linked by HN readers) are going to be AI slop, at which point it is not going to matter. "This article is AI" is going to add about as much insight to the conversation as "The author used a spell checker."

archagon 3mo ago
A good link aggregator should strive to select the <1% of articles that are actually high quality. Who cares what “everyone” is doing?
- pixl97 3mo ago
  Isn't that what the vote system is? If the users are selecting low quality then what exactly?
  - sph 3mo ago
    Then we are fucked. A quality platform must strive for more quality than what the average lurker, likely a bot, decides is worth reading. That’s how you get modern Reddit. Is the goal of this site to remain high-quality, or to rely on random, anonymous users to discern quality? Consider the possibility that the two options might be incompatible.
    - teiferer 3mo ago
      It might come as a surprise to you, but "random anonymous users discerning quality" is exactly how this site operates and that's working pretty well.
      - archagon 3mo ago
        I beg to differ. It's a far cry from where it was a decade ago.
        sph 3mo ago
        I agree with you, though you’ll find other old users that will claim people have been moaning about the ‘decline in morals’ of this site since its inception
- wartywhoa23 3mo ago
  > Who cares what “everyone” is doing? FOMO-suffering hype junkies do care if there's enough fellow roof jumpers to join to and sing something like "well, define high quality first" in chorus on their way to the ground.