Hacker News Reader

skippyfish: > the cost of reading [an infinite supply of arguments ...] remains high

you: > The cost of reading this story is not high

Do you see where you went wrong?

Please explain where I went wrong. Please explain why the onus is on the person presenting this story to account for all of the bad uses of AI, such that we should simply dismiss the story outright. This is pure idiocy.

The onus is always on the writer. No one is owed an audience.

That's not what I said. Do you have trouble reading? Are you subliterate or just lazy?

*> That's not what I said.

So close to spotting the mistake you made in your response to skippyfish, yet so far!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com