I would disagree. I watch ASMR videos on YouTube that sometimes contain ads. No only does the volume mismatch tend to be startling, but they're normally just ideologically startling and unwanted.
ASMR videos about sponsored products are weirdly the opposite for me though. They always feel so blatant, but for some reason it increases the ASMR, just knowing that the person in the video is trying to sell my something.
I do. And my comment related your comment back to the OP comment of this thread. Ads _inside of white noise podcasts_ being the thing I disagree with. Not ads in general. That's what the article itself is about as well.
You don't know me...
And if anything, your word choice and tone is extremely abrasive and drags down discussion. You could do better.
Is not a view informed by real experiences a more useful one than pure objectivity? Take the real experiences, subtract emotional weight/bias (as best as possible), disclaimer it with "based on real view" or however and I think that's a relatively well-formed useful piece of knowledge to disseminate. It is not an axiom, but a data point.
In this situation particularly, a white noise podcast is meant purely for the emotional pleasure of the listener. Subjective experience is _the_ optimizing factor. Ads interrupt that and are better placed where someone wants to be engaged in that way. This does not contradict that there is a _general_ necessity for ads. It's a refutation of this particular placement.
Haha, I'm not insulting you. We all have our style.
I'm more sympathizing that you're getting dragged over the coals for using AI when you're clearly not (you can't have been using it before it was invented) and it's just your style.
Apparently my style is to sound insulting when I don't intend to be.
Just ask ChatGPT, it will tell you. Since you won't write your own comments, why should we bother to write real responses?
ChatGPT says that comment has: Ambiguous Opening, Use of “Social Bell Curve, Overly Complex Sentences, Poor Assumptions, Subjectivity, Conflation of Idea, Stereotypin, Confrontational Tone, No Clear Conclusion.
Look. You and siblings are arguably bullying and mocking this commentator at this point. It doesn’t make you look so elegant either. Do you mind stopping?
that happens on HN every now and then, what concerns me is the flagging. The guy is simply responding to offending comments with even more offence. While not in the exact spirit of HN, the comments in the first place arent suited either.
I really hope this place isnt losing its libertarian approach. We dont have much apolitical alternatives, do we?
You got it wrong, by cobbling together chatbot responses into something that is barely coherent and not particularly engaging. Don't expect substantive replies to a screed you've partially outsourced to a model.
> - You yourself don't have experience in this area or any insights to share
> - You HAVE used ChatGPT though
We can tell that you have no experience or insights, and that you've used chatgpt; if I wished to continue the joke I'd paste your statement into chatgpt and get it to argue back with you. Would that be in any way worthwhile?
So that comment was written by ChatGPT? You accuse them of not having any insight but you yourself have so little insight you let ChatGPT write your internet comments for you
Could you please stop perpetuating flamewars on HN? I get that other commenters were being provocative but feeding it is not a good response, and you did it in a dozen places.
Best compliment so far. In my professional circles it might even be kind of boring or let's say, logically evident, to a lot of very experienced or intelligent people.
Corporate, eh, I mean I'm sure some stereotypical evil corporate people from a '90s movie would act as if they totally love it & get why ads are amazing...in that sense it might be pretty on the nose...
But these days I think the old adbusters take is kind of out of touch...anti-ad by itself isn't really nuanced enough for tractability in public discourse these days.
The comments are all hand-written, no LLM etc. Let's say artisanal, organic, ok I'll stop there
> “We” seems pretty appropriate, given everyone replying seems to agree
I guess it would be worth it to weigh in on this myself. I am simply not seeing what everyone else is seeing. Would you mind elaborating on what makes this so obvious?
> Best compliment so far. In my professional circles it might even be kind of boring or let's say, logically evident, to a lot of very experienced or intelligent people.
I mean I'm reading it to myself and the words make sense. Do you mean something else, like you personally can't imagine such a professional circle existing?
