How widespread and impactful is this problem?
Not every article/submission needs to be some big, serious new thing.
Is this worth our time to complain about this and upvote to number ONE article on HN?
If you do think language is an important topic, I think you should do some reflection on why that is, and how similar motivations might be driving people to feel it's important to argue against this kind of bot. It's easy to accidentally fall into an attitude where whatever things I personally don't mind are implicitly "neutral", and so anyone who argues against them must be looking for things to get mad about.
This doesn't follow from anything I've said.
> it's important to argue against this kind of bot.
But is it? What's the magnitude of this problem?
I've worked in SF and this is the first one I've seen.
> I don't know how to quantify that into a "magnitude", but I don't think that's a precondition for discussing the issues of the day.
Sure! You go ahead and prioritize your brainspace the way you want - but I'm frustrated that I keep having to see culture war crap because people dug up the one twitter user or github user with a bad take. And I'm frustrated that otherwise reasonable people turn into moralizing frenzy-bots as arbitrary and poorly conceived as a bot that changes "man page" into "person page", when they see that tiny sliver of takes.
As above, if it did sound like a topic you want to talk about, I think you should reflect on why that is and why people who aren't "moralizing frenzy-bots" might nevertheless want to talk about how they don't like it. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I've seen a lot of people say "I can't believe we're arguing about this nonsense" with the strong expectation that the result shouldn't be no conversation but a conversation where everyone agrees.
This article was, albeit briefly, number one on hackernews.
> I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I've seen a lot of people say "I can't believe we're arguing about this nonsense" with the strong expectation that the result shouldn't be no conversation but a conversation where everyone agrees.
Except, what you're effectively saying is you want a conversation where everyone agrees, because you don't want the people that think this is vacuous nonsense, to engage.
Why are new hires allowed to make bots on a company Slack server. Take away their privileges. Problem solved.
struct Simba {
int father;
int mother;
};
into struct Simba {
int parent;
int parent;
};
What 'bigger issue' is present here?