Someone should make a version of the Hacker News homepage that is just LLM extracts of key article details like this.

Not sure if it is still updating https://hackyournews.com/

If you read a lot of comment sections, there are bot accounts showing up on LLM that try to do this constantly.

Their output is not great so they get downvoted and spotted quickly.

Please not. There were some bots (or karma-farming users) doing this and yuck, was it annoying.

https://chatgpt.com/share/695d9ac2-c314-8011-8938-b0d7de7059...

You can paste any article and chatgpt (took the most laymen AI thing) and just writing summarize this article https://byteshape.com/blogs/Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507/

can give you insights about it.

Although I am all for freedom, one forgets that this is one of the few places left on internet where discussions feel meaningful and I am not judging you if you want AI but do it at your own discretion using chatbots.

If you want, you can even hack around a simple extension (tampermonkey etc.) where you can have a button which can do this for you if you really so desire.

Ended up being bored and asked chatgpt to do this but chatgpt is having something wrong, it got just blinking mode so I asked claude web (4.5 sonnet) to do it and I ended up building it with tampermonkey script.

Created the code. https://github.com/SerJaimeLannister/tampermonkey-hn-summari...

I was just writing this comment and I just got curious I guess so in the end ended up building it.

Although Edit: Thinking about it, I felt that we should read other people's articles as well. I just created this tool not out of endorsement of idea or anything but just curiosity or boredom but I think that we should probably read the articles themselves instead of asking chatgpt or LLM's about it.

There is this quote which I remembered right now

If something is worth talking/discussing about, its worth writing

If something is worth writing, then its worth reading.

Information that we write is fundamentally subjective (our writing style etc with our biases etc.), passing it through a black box which will try to homogenify all of it just feels like it misses the point.

I mean, they didn't bury it far in the article, it's like a two second skim into it and it's labelled with a tl;dr. Not a bad idea in general but you don't even need it for this one.