[sifar]

>> I think a useful litmus test for these kinds of stories is: do the people who most actively participate on them believe there's a conversation to be had, with multiple perspectives, not all of which agree with theirs? That's what this site is for.

This would disqualify more than half of AI/LLM/<insert_tech_person> stories. This seems like a cope out. It is our inability as tech people to embrace the discomfort that is not rational and engage with it.

[tptacek]

Huge problem on those stories, too! A lot of those threads are dreadful. My point exactly.

[zahlman]

Yes, I've been flagging a fair amount of them too.

Although generally I think the un-nuanced AI hype/doom articles are not nearly as damaging as the flood of one-shot LLM projects being presented under "Show HN" with apparently none of the framing text (HN post, project README, responses to feedback) being human-written.

[tptacek]

I think Show HN was due an overhaul even before vibecoding jammed it up, but I agree that's an issue too.

[zahlman]

I'm happy to hear your ideas about this, including off-site (I could email you if you like) if you don't want to go further off topic here.

[tptacek]

This thread isn't a great place for it, but I think we should formalize Show HN a bit (don't let people post freeform "Show HN" posts, have a submission queue) and then I have a lot of thoughts about community-based coaching.

[sifar]

My point is that the discrimination to flag one and not the other seems arbitrary. It has nothing to do with promoting/preserving intellectual curiosity etc. We are deluding ourselves by repeating that.

In that we are practicing the very doublethink we criticize in the society.

[tptacek]

I flag overheated AI stuff all the time.

[sifar]

I was referring to the general zeitgeist on the site rather than you specifically. Apologies if it seemed personal.

[tptacek]

Oh, I didn't take it personally, I just disagree with the premise.

[johnnyanmac]

And Dang will take action any day now...

[tptacek]

What makes you think he isn't? That's a rhetorical question; he and Tom obviously do intervene with those stories.

[johnnyanmac]

I've read his responses here and in other topics over 2025. He still seems to maintain that politics is something to avoid, regardless of quality. Not explicitly, but the way he talks about it gives that impression.

Having a tepidness when it comes to the dozens of slop articles on some trivial Ai blogs contradicts this mission to encourage curiosity and encourage a quality discussion. It feels outright contradictory and feeds into this sentiment that "anything tech is fine, nothing political is". Having flaggers do the work and promoting it as "community vote" is a convinent smokescreen, even though we all know flagging is based on a super minority of the community.

I know it feels knee-jerk, but I had this sentiment for a few years now as AI rose, and it of course hit a fever pitch in 2025. I think seeing a Tesla earnings call flagged because it wasn't stellar earnings really made me go from quiet apathy to being more vocal on the phenomenon. The actions (which I disagree on) simply do not match the words behind it (which I overall agree with).

[tptacek]

The quality of threads in politics discussions is absolutely dismal. Just the worst. Many of the flagged stories are quite good! But good stories are a superset of good HN threads, and threads are the point of the site.

I think it's noteworthy that we couldn't even keep a metadiscussion of this topic completely civil. This shouldn't surprise anyone. "Don't bring up religion or politics"; it's a rule of etiquette (and probably the most common bit of advice in the "Respect" section of every page on WikiVoyage). Why do we think we're exempt?

It's very difficult to talk about, because it's important and people have strongly held beliefs. Respect that, and the purpose of this site.

[tomhow]

> I think seeing a Tesla earnings call flagged because it wasn't stellar earnings

This is a perfect example of imagining or assuming our (or the community's) motivations or allegiances then criticising us for what you imagine or assume.

Tesla is far more commonly criticised than praised on HN these days. The moderators have no allegiance or care for Tesla, its reputation or its stock price.

If a ”Tesla earnings call” story was flagged, it would be for the same reason that almost all earnings call or stock price stories are flagged on HN; they usually don't qualify as great topics for curious conversation.