[willbw]

This feels like another in a long line of questionably written essays that get posted here. As an example:

> Right now, every ML “breakthrough” is going towards making addictive media products more addictive and towards advertising that exerts more control over consumers. So this needs to change.

> Luckily, regulation is doable! As is fighting the system. I mean, it’s won’t be easy, but local organizations everywhere, such as social democratic organizations, are working together to push for positive economic change. And they’re quite social.

A claim backed up by zero evidence . We need "more regulation"? To what end? Even the long form article doesn't illustrate the point. It says

>If we made a pie chart representing the money that is made from deep learning

but doesn't bother to present neither a pie chart nor any underlying facts to back up this claim. It also talks about regulating political donations which seems... difficult to connect to the topic at hand.

I am in favour of people trying to improve their writing and publishing blog posts but this just looks like the author didn't spend much time collecting their thoughts. If they have edited this down, they could have fooled me.

I don't mean to discourage the author - I am confident they can improve their writing and should definitely attempt to do so. I am just trying to understand why these articles are being upvoted when to my eyes they aren't of high quality.