These topic-adjacent expert responses just reek of point harvesting by an LLM, I didn't do any such downvoting, but in the last year I've changed to this viewpoint.
It's generally just barely on topic, generic fluff. Anything similar could have been posted, topic adjacent, without really contributing to the discussion. Remember we are on a discussion forum, not a place to dump data.
Good y'all, however much I (born human and have all my shots) may have the misfortune to attract downvotes, I'm not a fershlugginer LLM. (Not sure what this says about my social skills, no wonder my dance card is M.T.) I do think that it was an interesting addition to the discussion of giant buglies. I personally had never thought about how predation by birds would have pressured prehistoric insects... and made our feathered friends so specialised and good at what they do.
I don't think you are! I was only moved to comment by the implication upthread that an informative LLM-generated comment might be welcome here. But yes, another HN norm is not making insinuations about commenters on threads (if people have concerns, they're meant to email hn@yc about it). And yet another norm is not to drive threads into their own navels with metacommentary, so here's where I should shut up.
There's the leaderboard. Though the one time I noticed I'd showed up on it (others have long since overtaken me), it felt more like a warning I was spending too much time here.
I didn't know there was a leader board but now that I've looked at it I'm kind of disgusted by the fact that 20-ish percent of it is made up of names that are recognizable in an "oh, it's that guy who's always posting low effort links or riding the coat tails of a popular comment" way.
