I often find the value of HN is less in the links and more in the comments. I went to check the article mentioned [1] and many of the higher ranked comments are simply using the article as a jumping off point. The top comments starts out with "A little tangential, but..." which is pretty common to see on HN. The quality of the writing of an article is mostly irrelevant in that instance because the value being generated is from the topic itself evoking conversation and the topic was provided by the human prompt.
Also 2 of the 22 top level comments mentioned GPT-3 and several others are clearly just riffing off the headline. I think the percentage of people who actually read the article and realized something was off about it was higher than the author is implying.