Ask HN: Real Karma?
I was wondering, with AI and stuff, why do we still rely on human likes and dislikes? (in general, not HN-specific)
It seems like an ideal application of text-based inference: to assign points depending on how someone interacts in a discussion (using correct factual arguments, not straying away, not misdirecting, being considerate and reasonable, and so on).
It surprises me that no one tried it before.
So, why we don't have any automated explicit karma-based moderator anywhere?
7 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 25.5 ms ] threadFurther progress is blocked by the need to develop a general test classifier, that is blocked by the project of migrating my arangodb systems (like my RSS reader) to Postgres.
Dispense with karma altogether and have an AI rewrite all submitted comments to conform to the guidelines.
In fact, why stop there?
Have every submission auto-generate a thread. Hell, have the AI crawl the web and make submissions. The ultimate form of HN - maximal information density, topicality and factual accuracy, absolute conformity to guidelines and civility. Eternal September is impossible if there are no actual humans involved.
Edit: look, I made a better Hacker News with a prompt in Claude[0]. A couple of scripts and they can dump all this humanslop and replace it with something true hackers can appreciate.
https://claude.ai/public/artifacts/0e7eb83c-5cb9-4611-a9e4-5...