[gus_massa]

Most tech stories are submitted from different sources. Each time there is a big new, there are like 10 or 20 newspapers/blogs/tech-sites that write a coverage.

The mods somehow try to keep only one, if they are too similar, but sometimes it's difficult. And in some cases each day there is a new part of the story that appears, and that sometimes make the new post interesting.

[Normille]

  >Most tech stories are submitted from different sources. Each time there is a big new, there are like 10 or 20 newspapers/blogs/tech-sites that write a coverage.

Yes. and most of those news sources are pretty indistinguishable from each other too. Simply re-hashing the same press releases as everyone else with the obligatory quoting of tweets --which is what passes for investigative journalism these days. I'll grant you that may account for some of the dupliction. But I see the same stories from the same sources submitted time after time, too.

I just find it really irritating. It's little different from spam, in my opinion and I wish people would have the courtesy towards other HN users to spend a few seconds checking if a story has already been submitted before mashing the Submit button themselves. In some cases people are still re-submitting major tech stories days after they happened.

A classic example was Musk's take over of Twitter. I remember there were 30+ submissions of that story alone, when I counted part way through the day it hppened and people were still submitting it a couple of days later. That's just downright spamming, in my book. Who the hell can frequent HN and think that, 3 days after the event, no-one will yet have shared with the rest of us the biggest tech news story of the year?

As I always say, when getting on my soapbox about this: Just try spending a few days using HN, with the 'Newest' section as your landing page and you'll soon see how much of a problem this is:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newest

[gus_massa]

I agree but it's worse with science news. There are a few science sites that just cut and paste the press release from the university. When the press release is horrible but linkbaity, the only good part is that I can take a look at the research paper and wikipedia. So when it's reposted from another URL I can write a comment trying to fix the press release or debunking the article.

I actually prefer to read \newest . The discussions in the front page usually have so many comments and the discussion gets less technical. Repetition and spam is a problem, but it's nice to find a few jewels from time to time.