For some threads on HN the article headline works as a seed for discussion where we gain more value, then the content isn't always that valuable human or GPT. For other's where the content is more important, they simply wont get upvoted when it's reconstituted garbage.
> If in the future AI can write as captivating and as structured as a skilled human, then why should we not enjoy reading it?
GPT, stable diffusion etc, all very clever and fun. Still about 3 billion light years away from anything resembling intelligence. What they have on their side is a massive source of pre-existing creativity, so if you are seeing something genuinely deep or artful, it's probably from a human... through ML.
For some threads on HN the article headline works as a seed for discussion where we gain more value, then the content isn't always that valuable human or GPT. For other's where the content is more important, they simply wont get upvoted when it's reconstituted garbage.