Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think this reads to me as a way for you to couch your ignorance as criticism while learning nothing from reading a study like this. Why not do this for your own biases?

What metrics do you focus on while reading an article that result in you confirming your own preconceived ideas?

If you have to come at an article like this in a hostile way, then you're not learning anythign about it, you're just confirming your own biases. I think I would recommend that you focus all of these criticisms inward at your own biases in terms of what you react to and need to explain and see if it's explained in the paper above. Then see if you find yourself convinced by the scientific method that they undertook?

Otherwise you're prepping yourself to continue living in an echo chamber.





i'm not even talking about the article. are you a bot?

“It brings up some interesting points for this article...”

Why are you acting like a LLM that had its own earlier statements run off the end of the context window and can’t remember you yourself said them?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: