Comments are for humans but I don't think there is any reason for HN to police the submissions as a policy. If any article lacks credibility or merit to the extent that one can't even finish reading it then just ignore it and move on. Vote for something else. If "LLM aversion" is your rationale, so be it.

Personally, I usually check the comments before deciding to read something so I appreciate that others have saved me the trouble of reading this article in particular. If the author doesn't care enough to use human time to write it then I am not going to use human time to read it.

▲

bahmboo 15 hours ago | parent [-]

Wow. That's outsourcing a lot of thought, overriding your individual interpretation. I guess it's pretty common here.

▲

esterna 13 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This also applies to reading restaurant reviews before visiting. Or for that matter, reading any published book you outsource judgement to the publishing house (what books they pick up). Or, if you are easily convinced by jargon: Exploration has a non-zero opportunity cost.

	▲	bahmboo 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is HN where we discuss specific things such as articles, blog posts and tweets. There is often good insight in the comments but mostly it’s people talking about their opinions. I’d rather review the item myself first and then come for the extra nuggets that might be in the comments. Likening this to restaurant reviews and publishing houses is disingenuous. One is nothing like this and the other is not helpful in that it’s such a generalization of influence as to be not useful. Everything is an influence doesn’t mean anything.

▲

zenoprax 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> overriding your individual interpretation

Presumptuous.

▲

bahmboo 10 hours ago | parent [-]

Ok, influencing

	▲	throwaway67743 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Or perhaps: correct.