The reality distortion field is strong around anthropic. Anthropic posts tons of equally bullshit blog posts, written entirely by AI, saying absolutely nothing, to the front page and they consistently average many hundreds of upvotes.

I have to wonder if HN is astroturfed. Anthropic and OpenAI can post about a new model and it gets over to HN instantly and is full of glowing reviews of supposedly real people who supposedly have had prior access to it who supposedly think it's the best model yet.

Feels doubly so for Anthropic. There's just unbelievable level of glaze, and insane upvote velocity for "blog posts" that are essentially fluffed up feature documentation.

Somehow everything boris says has become the word of God. The dude is just an engineer, like you and me, who gets unlimited tokens for free.

Yeah, I sometimes catch these posts minutes after they were submitted and they're full of highly upvoted glowing reviews that maintain their momentum on the top of the page.

And this is hacker news. A place where famously the most upvoted comment is the one critical of the post.

Upvoter here. Nothing special -- I like Claude a lot. I found it more ergonomic to work with, and I think its models are state of the art. I believe I'm more productive especially in legacy crufty codebases.

I may not be representative of the universe or have a controlled, randomized study to back it up, but that's not what upvotes are for are they?

That's a fair point. To play devils advocate to myself, it's possible that the huge upvote share is due to a much bigger marketshare among our community.

HN is astroturfed. Not just AI and also before AI took off. It's so easy and so valuable to astroturf HN

The tech field has always been full of naive technology boosters. HN might be heavily astroturfed for all I know but I am sure there are many real people in a state of constant excitement over the progress of AI.