upvote
> That may be, but it's also exposing a lot of gatekeeping

"Gatekeeping" became a trendy term for a while, but in the post-LLM world people are recognizing that "gatekeeping" is not the same as "having a set of standards or rules by which a community abides".

If you have a nice community where anyone can come in and do whatever they want, you no longer have a community, you have a garbage dump. A gate to keep out the people who arrive with bags of garbage is not a bad thing.

reply
I would argue the term "gatekeeping" is being twisted around when it comes to AI. I see genuine gatekeeping when people with a certain skill or qualification try to discourage newcomers by making their field seem mysterious and only able to be done by super special people, and intimidating or making fun of newbies who come along and ask naive questions.

"Gatekeeping" is NOT when you require someone to be willing learn a skill in order to join a community of people with that skill.

And in fact, saying "you are too stupid to learn that on your own, use an AI instead" is kind of gatekeeping on its own, because it implicitly creates a shrinking elite who actually have the knowledge (that is fed to the AI so it can be regurgitated for everyone else), shutting out the majority who are stuck in the "LLM slum".

reply
Making ham radio operators learn Morse Code was "requiring someone to be willing to learn a skill". Also pure gatekeeping.
reply
While at first glance LLMs do help expose and even circumvent gatekeeping, often it turns out that gatekeeping might have been there for a reason.

We have always relied on superficial cues to tell us about some deeper quality (good faith, willingness to comply with code of conduct, and so on). This is useful and is a necessary shortcut, as if we had to assess everyone and everything from first principles every time things would grind to a halt. Once a cue becomes unviable, the “gate” is not eliminated (except if briefly); the cue is just replaced with something else that is more difficult to circumvent.

I think that brief time after Internet enabled global communication and before LLMs devalued communication signals was pretty cool; now it seems like there’s more and more closed, private or paid communities.

reply
Really? You think LLMs are a bigger shift in how internet communities are than big corporations like Google, Facebook etc.? I personally see much less change last few years than I did 15 years ago.
reply
Most ideas aren't interesting. Implementations are interesting. I don't care if you worked hard on your implementation or not, but I do care if it solves the problem in a novel or especially efficient way. These are not the hallmarks of AI solutions.
reply
In the vast majority of contexts I don’t want “novel” and “interesting” implementations, I want boring and proven ones.
reply
In the vast majority of contexts I'm not using "Show HN" submissions to manage important functions of my life.
reply
I think that having some difficulty and having to "bloody your forehead" acts as a filter that you cared enough to put a lot of effort into it. From a consumer side, someone having spent a lot of time on something certainly isn't a guarantee that it is good, but it provides _some_ signal about the sincerity of the producer's belief in it. IMO it's not gatekeeping to only want to pay attention to things that care went into: it's just normal human behavior to avoid unreasonable asymmetries of effort.
reply
It's not a hazing ritual, it's a valuable learning experience. Yes, it's nice to have the option of foregoing it, but it's a tradeoff.
reply
So the point of a "Show HN" is to showcase your valuable learning experience?
reply
What the article is saying is:

"the author (pilot?) hasn't generally thought too much about the problem space, and so there isn't really much of a discussion to be had. The cool part about pre-AI show HN is you got to talk to someone who had thought about a problem for way longer than you had. It was a real opportunity to learn something new, to get an entirely different perspective."

reply
Right, so it's about the person and how they've qualified themselves, and not about what they've built.

I feel like I've been around these parts for a while, and that is not my experience of what Show HN was originally about, though I'm sure there was always an undercurrent of status hierarchy and approval-seeking, like you suggest.

reply
It's not about status. It's about interest. A joiner is not going to have an interesting conversation about joinery with someone who has put some flatpak furniture together.
reply
Oh, is that what Show HN is? A community of craftspeople discussing their craft? I hadn't realized.
reply
Based on your replies here, one thing it really doesn't seem like is a community of people trying to earnestly exchange ideas or points of view. It really seems like you're viewing this whole thing as some sort of debate contest or point sparring, and its both aggravating and disappointing to read.

What is your hoped for outcome here man? To come off like enough of a jerk or obtuse enough that people just abandon the thread and you can declare victory?

reply
I think people are retconning a lot of things onto Show HN that aren't actually part of the ethos of Show HN. That's not new; in the past, people have tried the same thing to suggest Show HN is about, say, open source software only.

I don't dispute the quality decline on Show HN or the need for some kind of intervention, but this particular argument about how AI interacts with "Show HN" is in fact introducing a new and significant element of gatekeeping to it.

Show HN is not in fact a craftspersons forum! Craft can be one of the things it's about, but it's not the only thing.

reply
I think the valuable learning experience can be what makes a Show HN worth viewing, if it's worth viewing. (I don't feel precious about it though.. I didn't think Show HN was particularly engaging before AI either)
reply
Did you just "it's not x, it's y" me?
reply
Gatekeeping can be a good thing -- if you have to put effort into what you create, you're going to be more selective about what ideas you invest in. I wouldn't call that "bloodying your forehead", I'd call it putting work into something before demanding attention
reply
It's not about having to put in effort for the sake of it, the point is that building something by hand you will gain insight into the problem, which insight then becomes a valuable contribution.
reply
What if the AI produces writing that better accomplishes my goal than writing it myself? Why do you feel differently about these two acts?

For what it's worth, the unifying idea behind both is basically a "hazing ritual", or more neutrally phrased, skin in the game. It takes time and energy to look at things people produce. You should spend time and energy making sure I'm not looking at a pile of shit. Doesn't matter if it's a website or prose.

Obviously some people don't. And that's why the signal to noise ratio is becoming shit very quickly.

reply
It doesn't, is the problem. If it did, I would feel differently.
reply
Nothing wrong with some degree of gatekeeping though. A measured amount of elitism is a force for good.
reply
Some people here enjoy solutions to difficult technical problems? It's not product hunt
reply
> what was interesting about a "Show HN" post was that someone had the technical competence to put something together

Wouldn't the masses of Show HN posts that have gotten no interest pre-AI refute that?

reply
gatekeeping is just a synonym for curration by people who don't like the currators choice.

And we are going to need more curration so goddamned badly....

reply
I can't believe the mods at /r/screenprinting took down my post on the CustomInk shirt I ordered.
reply