Hacker News Reader

You may not ever be able to persuade a bot, but you can identify if it is capable of repudiating your points or not. You can ascertain if it is arguing in good faith and chose to end an argument if it isn’t.

When you say “find an argument that works” isn’t this just saying that they’ve said something you find persuasive?

What’s wrong with this? How is this different to any other argument in good faith?

View on HN

Because we have to assume not everyone can ascertain what are bad faith or dishonest arguments, or even good faith but illogical arguments. People are fallable and can be persuaded by bad arguments. So the point is, given enough time, the person will make a mistake and fall for a bad argument.

As someone struggling to destroy some of my own beliefs, due to their potential to waste a lot of my time. I have failed to do so.

The perceptions of other disagreeing people ended up just being one more way to validate them because you end up seeing the same pattern of mistakes over and over again.

> you can identify if it is capable of repudiating your points or not.

Wait until GPT5. Or don’t, because a vast amount of people are already incapable of that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com