←back to thread

Auto-grading decade-old Hacker News discussions with hindsight

(karpathy.bearblog.dev)
615 points __rito__ | 3 comments | 10 Dec 25 17:23 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source

Related from yesterday: Show HN: Gemini Pro 3 imagines the HN front page 10 years from now - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46205632
Show context
modeless ◴[10 Dec 25 19:17 UTC] No.46222213[source]▶
This is a cool idea. I would install a Chrome extension that shows a score by every username on this site grading how well their expressed opinions match what subsequently happened in reality, or the accuracy of any specific predictions they've made. Some people's opinions are closer to reality than others and it's not always correlated with upvotes.

An extension of this would be to grade people on the accuracy of the comments they upvote, and use that to weight their upvotes more in ranking. I would love to read a version of HN where the only upvotes that matter are from people who agree with opinions that turn out to be correct. Of course, only HN could implement this since upvotes are private.

replies(7): >>46222748 #>>46223194 #>>46223649 #>>46224507 #>>46226548 #>>46228558 #>>46229291 #
cootsnuck ◴[10 Dec 25 19:51 UTC] No.46222748[source]▶
The RES (Reddit Enhancement Suite) browser extension indirectly does this for me since it tracks the lifetime number of upvotes I give other users. So when I stumble upon a thread with a user with like +40 I know "This is someone whom I've repeatedly found to have good takes" (depending on the context).

It's subjective of course but at least it's transparently so.

I just think it's neat that it's kinda sorta a loose proxy for what you're talking about but done in arguably the simplest way possible.

replies(2): >>46223139 #>>46224287 #
nickff ◴[10 Dec 25 20:17 UTC] No.46223139[source]▶
I am not a Redditor, but RES sounds like it would increase the ‘echo-chamber’ effect, rather than improving one’s understanding of contributors’ calibration.
replies(5): >>46223212 #>>46223419 #>>46223446 #>>46229052 #>>46229324 #
baq ◴[11 Dec 25 09:25 UTC] No.46229324[source]▶
Echo chamber of rational, thoughtful and truthful speakers is what I’m looking for in Internet forums.
replies(2): >>46234952 #>>46235381 #
1. red-iron-pine ◴[11 Dec 25 18:50 UTC] No.46235381{4}[source]▶
flat earth creationists would describe their colleagues the same way.

a group of them certainly is an echo chamber; why isn't your view?

replies(2): >>46238315 #>>46239615 #
2. ahf8Aithaex7Nai ◴[11 Dec 25 22:39 UTC] No.46238315[source]▶
He doesn't deny that his point of view forms an echo chamber.
3. xmprt ◴[12 Dec 25 00:56 UTC] No.46239615[source]▶
An echo chamber is a product of your own creation. If you're willing to upvote people who disagree with your and actively seek out opposite takes to be genuinely curious about, then you're probably not in an echo chamber.

The tools for controlling your feed are reducing on social media like Instagram, TikTok, Youtube, etc., but simply saying that you follow and respect the opinions of a select group doesn't necessarily mean you're forming an echo chamber.

This is different from something like flat earth/other conspiracy theories where when confronted with opposite evidence, they aren't likely to engage with it in good faith.