Hate to admit this but reading the comments will give a person way more knowledge than any given submission and if the comments are good the article is required reading before adding your own comment. Not sure ChatGPT is worth the effort here. By the time you cut and paste then read the gibberish one could have already read the top few comments (you can use the minus to minimize them and read the next thread). Like the time spent leaving this comment would be better used any where else, but yet here it is (all 300 seconds or if you like 300,000 ms)
The original reply was looking for a summary of the article which ChatGPT can supply, not more info, which is typically more where one might go to the comments and join the discussion. Two different streets on my map.
Just be aware that comments on HN are subject to all sorts of opinions skewed by bias and sycophantism, the same way Reddit or Mastodon silos tend to be. I think a lot of users think HN has some sort of immunity to that, so the tribalism tends to be strong and stubborn.
Agree 100% with everything you said and the comment I left was very low quality. It would be interesting to see a ChatGPT summary for each submission to HN and the comments to give you an overview of the content that was auto generated. The main point was the time it takes to cut, and paste is not zero. Personally, spending that time reading the top comments seems more useful (to me) than reading a ChatGPT summary of the article, but like you say two different streets.
