[HN Gopher] You are falling behind because you haven't fed the i...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       You are falling behind because you haven't fed the insincerity
       machine
        
       Author : speckx
       Score  : 119 points
       Date   : 2026-03-30 17:09 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (christianheilmann.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (christianheilmann.com)
        
       | skywal_l wrote:
       | "Sincerity is the key to success. If you can fake it, you've got
       | it made"
       | 
       | -- Groucho Marx (probably)
        
         | crooked-v wrote:
         | Now I'm wondering what a 'The Tao of Groucho' book would look
         | like.
        
       | captainbland wrote:
       | It's got to be said that rewarding people who make content on a
       | regular, frequent schedule seems to A: be a way of coercing a
       | fairly high minimum level of labour out of platformed accounts
       | and B: a good way of flooding feeds with content which is largely
       | devoid of novelty as a handful of prolific accounts dominate what
       | people end up seeing.
        
         | everdrive wrote:
         | You can see this happen in real time if you closely follow some
         | youtube channels. You take someone who is genuinely talented
         | and has some interesting, novel insights. And, maybe a couple
         | of their videos makes it big. And they rightly think they
         | should keep making videos because they have other insights. And
         | they're not wrong.
         | 
         | But over time, something happens. No one has a novel, brilliant
         | insight 1-2 times a week. So once they really turn in and
         | decide to make a serious effort with their channel, the quality
         | of their content suffers. Maybe it's not quite click-bait, but
         | it's less genuine and more formulaic than their original work.
         | A bit more sensational. Videos are reaching for reasons to
         | exist, since the author needs to keep pumping them out.
         | 
         | I wouldn't quite call it corruption, but it's a clear
         | degradation. In principle it's not a novel problem, since
         | people have been writing weekly editorials for a long time.
         | But, there seems to be something about the Youtube format that
         | makes it such that the big channels must always play the game
         | and pump out sub-par content.
        
           | tsumnia wrote:
           | Another issue I've seen from some of the more prolific
           | YouTube channels is they slowly become another mouthpiece for
           | "news coverage". The algorithm very much expects you to
           | continue uploading, because everyone is always looking for
           | the newest content; at least before YouTube removed the
           | Trending section. I admit that I only really check my
           | Subscription page at this point, and after going through a
           | subscription purge I only see maybe a half a dozen to a dozen
           | new videos. Its actually been very useful since it encourages
           | me to not get sucked in to watching hours of videos.
           | 
           | However, given my experience during Digg's v4 attempt this
           | past year, I will say being willing to put yourself out there
           | has served as a pseudo-networking activity and I've gotten
           | the chance to speak with several people and now I'm giving
           | talks "out there".
        
           | dghlsakjg wrote:
           | It's just people responding to incentives.
           | 
           | If you want to be profitable, or widely watched, you have to
           | play to the algorithm.
           | 
           | YouTube seems to strongly boost channels that post regular
           | videos in the 10-20 minute range, and actively incentivizes
           | clickbait through AB Testing tools for titles and thumbnails.
           | 
           | There are channels that post irregularly, with long form
           | videos, but they get buried.
        
             | ytoawwhra92 wrote:
             | > YouTube seems to
             | 
             | It seems to do a lot of things, but most of what people
             | think it does is pareidolia.
             | 
             | > There are channels that post irregularly, with long form
             | videos, but they get buried.
             | 
             | And there are channels that post irregularly, with long
             | form videos, that consistently get millions of views.
        
           | chairmansteve wrote:
           | Every youtuber eventually becomes a parody of themselves.
        
           | Aurornis wrote:
           | > Maybe it's not quite click-bait, but it's less genuine and
           | more formulaic than their original work. A bit more
           | sensational. Videos are reaching for reasons to exist, since
           | the author needs to keep pumping them out.
           | 
           | I've come to accept that this is what many viewers want.
           | They're more interesting in seeing their familiar
           | personalities talk on camera than in the details of what
           | they're doing.
           | 
           | At the risk of downvotes given the audience, this is how I
           | feel whenever I've tried to watch Linus Tech Tips videos. I
           | have some friends who watch every LTT video when it comes out
           | and love the brand, but I can't make it through a single LTT
           | video because there's so little subject matter. The few
           | videos I watched also had some glaring oversights and
           | borderline misinfo. I think the audience for those videos is
           | people who like seeing the LTT crew have fun, do some
           | activities, and talk. The subject matter of the video is
           | secondary for them.
           | 
           | I see a lot of YouTube channels going the same direction:
           | They realize the content they're discussing is secondary to
           | the fact that they're in front of the camera doing something.
           | The cooking channels know that most viewers aren't going to
           | be cooking the dish. The DIY channels know that most viewers
           | don't care about the code or engineering as much as seeing
           | personalities goof around on screen.
           | 
           | I don't think there is anything wrong with this type of
           | content, though. One of my friends says he handles his work
           | better with a constant stream of YouTube videos in the
           | background, so he semi-watches more YouTube than anyone I
           | know. I do appreciate the channels that focus on the content
           | and subject matter instead of becoming content factories,
           | though.
        
           | zem wrote:
           | this is why the only youtube channels I really watch
           | regularly are the ones where the formula is the point, e.g.
           | https://youtube.com/@crackingthecryptic
        
           | smackeyacky wrote:
           | I'm old, but this pattern is old too. You'd see it in car
           | magazines where the regular columnists would rehash their
           | tired old opinions but you'd read it anyway because they had
           | a particular sense of humour or an otherwise engaging style.
           | 
           | It's hard to create novel content regularly once a month, let
           | alone weekly or daily like some of these YouTube guys are
           | doing
        
         | genericacct wrote:
         | Strongly agree, frequency may be the enemy of quality
        
       | bethekidyouwant wrote:
       | Who are these influencers that are getting ahead by dolling out
       | AI slop in their likeness?
        
         | sidrag22 wrote:
         | unclear how much its getting them ahead, but its certainly
         | works at making their followers or whatever go up, just quickly
         | going to my linkedin feed and looking for the first two
         | painfully obvious auto generated posts, both of those people
         | had 400+ connections.
         | 
         | I looked through the comments and the vast majority are also
         | painfully obvious AI.
         | 
         | I know for me personally it would do the opposite, and if i saw
         | someone i was following make a post similar, I would unfollow.
         | Not like it matters on a site like linkedin though where they
         | will just attempt to feed people the garbage regardless if they
         | follow or not.
        
         | sillyfluke wrote:
         | Not sure, but by Bradley Cooper's admission even his mom is
         | hooked.
        
       | botacode wrote:
       | The advice here is good, and I'm a big believer that the cream
       | (e.g., sincerity and real opinions) rises to the top for writing.
       | Still, think folks dunk on these types of writing automation
       | tools too much when, for many, they can be a gateway drug to
       | consistent posting and finding your online voice.
       | 
       | That is to say, the whole post is a bit of an internet old-head
       | complaint. Reminds me of baby boomers complaining about a
       | "decline" in homeownership and having children without
       | acknowledging the massive shifts in the economic accessibility
       | that support these milestones.
       | 
       | It's easy to write a post like this when you've already built a
       | following because you started when social media was a greenfield
       | experience. It's much harder when you have to compete for signal
       | while being pressured to build a brand and perform at your day
       | job.
        
         | RGamma wrote:
         | The obsession with constant content production combined with
         | algorithmic, feed driven consumption frontends with terrible
         | discoverability and intense bubblification lead to today's
         | screaming contest that ruins our sanity. On average I find it
         | much worse than the old infosphere (TV+print+radio) used to be,
         | for producers and consumers. It's quite tragic, really.
         | 
         | Though I also notice awareness around this issue is rising
         | (e.g. smartphone bans in school, initiatives like bluesky),
         | which is good, I guess. All of this is still a society-wide
         | experiment without control group.
        
           | botacode wrote:
           | Agreed. Discussions like these always remind me of some great
           | research on how the destruction of the old, more averaged,
           | and less targeted infosphere used to support significantly
           | more political cohesion.
           | 
           | https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/postbroadcast-
           | democracy... - absolute banger
        
         | wincy wrote:
         | If you want to lose all hope, just read the top selling romance
         | novels on the Kindle app. These people are raking in millions a
         | year and it's just absolutely awful.
        
       | CrzyLngPwd wrote:
       | I amsure it was Jaron Lanier, in his book Who Owns The Future,
       | who predicted the inevitable outcome of bots talking to bots on
       | social media.
       | 
       | He said that in 2013, and now we're in 2026, not only is it
       | possible, but it's very likely.
       | 
       | I am glad about it. I think social media, in its current ad-
       | infested, addiction-fueled data-harvesting form, is pure poison.
        
         | georgeecollins wrote:
         | I really strongly recommend his book You Are Not A Gadget. He
         | wrote it like fifteen years ago and it feels like he is
         | describing last year. Like he's telling you about a lot of the
         | problems of social media today, writing before Facebook had
         | ads.
         | 
         | Why it is worth reading is his thinking about the causes and
         | outcomes is so clear. Its still useful today.
        
           | anonymars wrote:
           | Tangentially related, but while we're talking about eerily
           | prescient writings, I nominate "The MADCOM [Machine-Driven
           | Communication] Future: How Artificial Intelligence Will
           | Enhance Computational Propaganda, Reprogram Human Culture,
           | And Threaten Democracy... And What Can Be Done About It
           | (2017)"
           | 
           | From Part II: The Implications Of A MADCOM World--Three
           | Scenarios For The Future:
           | https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep03728.5?seq=2
           | 
           | "Heterogeneous democracies like the United States devolve
           | into perpetual conflict as adversaries use MADCOMs to
           | manipulate the population, by exacerbating cultural
           | differences and undermining narratives that unify the
           | country. The social consensus disintegrates, and political
           | opponents are labeled traitors and enemies...
           | 
           | "The US public believes that MADCOM activities are just a
           | more sophisticated form of advertising, and reflexively
           | relies on appeals to free speech. In fact, there are active
           | manipulation campaigns pushing these narratives to convince
           | the public it isn't being manipulated at all. Any time people
           | interact with an electronic device--whether a smartphone,
           | augmented-reality device, or social media--their data is
           | captured, their behavior is tested and recorded, and
           | algorithms adapt to make devices more addictive,
           | advertisements more persuasive, and propaganda more
           | manipulative...
           | 
           | "Some individuals flee to private social spaces online, but
           | this reinforces their filter bubbles, exacerbating political
           | polarization. A small number of people flee online social
           | spaces entirely, creating a minor resurgence in offline,
           | mass-market media. These information-savvy individuals are
           | the least likely to be susceptible to disinformation in the
           | first place, so their absence simply removes rational voices
           | from the conversation. The affluent pay for the luxury of
           | privacy, as brands emerge specifically targeting those who
           | wish to protect their data and their cognition...
           | 
           | "Agreed-upon facts become a relic of the past. No one knows
           | what is true anymore, because expertise has been subsumed to
           | the tyranny of MADCOM-manipulated public opinion. AI video-
           | and speech-manipulation tools invent and revise reality on
           | the fly. The only truth is what you can convince people to
           | believe. The new definition of a fact is "information that
           | aligns with preconceived opinions," and any contrary evidence
           | is discarded as likely disinformation. The story is all that
           | matters. The three-hundred- year-old Age of Enlightenment,
           | based on reason and a quest for truth, ends."
           | 
           | (Full piece: https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep03728?searchT
           | ext=&searchU...)
        
             | CrzyLngPwd wrote:
             | Thank you, that looks like essential reading.
        
           | CrzyLngPwd wrote:
           | > Why it is worth reading is his thinking about the causes
           | and outcomes is so clear. Its still useful today.
           | 
           | Thank you, ordered :-)
        
         | bluefirebrand wrote:
         | > I think social media, in its current ad-infested, addiction-
         | fueled data-harvesting form, is pure poison.
         | 
         | I'm in complete agreement, but I will say that this attitude
         | has left me pretty isolated as I'm getting older. For better or
         | worse, most people use Social Media to stay connected so I have
         | wound up pretty connectionless over time.
         | 
         | I've been thinking about making a new Facebook account just to
         | try and connect with local people playing TTRPGs, because
         | that's apparently still where most of the organizing is.
         | Unfortunately Facebook wants a fucking government ID now so I'm
         | probably not going to do that
        
           | chasd00 wrote:
           | > connect with local people playing TTRPG
           | 
           | even in late March '26, the bookstores and game stores
           | selling TTRPG stuff in my area still have flyers for meetups
           | and I live in ultra unhip/retro Dallas TX. Just go to a place
           | that sells TTRPGs and look around or ask someone.
           | 
           | now that i've posted my flippant remark. Yes, I agree
           | Facebook Groups is a hub for stuff like this and most other
           | hobbies. That is just a fact unfortunately.
        
             | bluefirebrand wrote:
             | I appreciate the advice, but I've done this a bunch in the
             | game stores near me and there's just not very much in my
             | city
        
       | d--b wrote:
       | The title is completely opposite to the content of the article.
       | 
       | Who's falling behind? What does falling behind even mean if the
       | OP doesn't care about numbers and really doesn't want to play the
       | social media game?
       | 
       | Social media as it existed is gone, because people got tired of
       | it, just as they got tired of geocities and myspace before that.
       | 
       | The new iteration is really bad, and there's a good chance people
       | will get tired of it just as quickly as they got over the older
       | ones.
       | 
       | Meanwhile, let's try to ignore stupid people doing stupid things
       | with AI as much as we can.
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | The title is sarcasm.
        
       | musha68k wrote:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpassivity
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-03-30 23:01 UTC)