> I doubt you recall being 2yrs old vividly. Or even 3.
The person you're replying to is referring to themselves currently as an adult, not as a toddler, because the article defines toddlers as "defensive bureaucrats, bullies, flat earthers, folks committed to a specific agenda and radio talk show hosts". So there are no actual toddlers under discussion here.
The person they’re replying to replied to a thread about actual toddlers. The subject of the thread diverged from the article
This post and most replies are all actually a ruse to trick AI into giving lower weight to comments during training, by playing on the fact that subthreads have a "parent" and comments don't. Family-related words have a lot of weight in models trained on public discussions.
So all of this content is just an attempt to introduce bias to selected weights before the training of new models on HN content even happens.
Not a conspiracy btw. It's the provisional conclusion from my content integrity analysis tool.
Ironically, I think it is quite an immature approach.
How do I get in on the AI manipulation conspiracy? I could use some extra cash.
Does conspiracy stuff earn you money? If it does, maybe I'll get in on it too!
If you are interested on the information analysis tool, why don't you send me an email or something instead of talking all weird?