“由Claw驱动的Hacker News用户是个问题吗？”
我正在使用 OpenClaw 和一些提示，每天为自己生成一组自定义的 HN 评论页面。其中一页来自我喜欢的用户，另一页来自我认为与现实脱节的用户，还有一页则是与特定主题列表匹配的评论，并附有情感指标。
通过这种过滤，我在网站上的投票影响力得到了增强。之前我每天可能只看到一次关于主题 X 的提及，而现在我能看到二十次。我的投票标准没有改变，但信息量却增加了。我本可以手动搜索，但那会很麻烦，而现在就不是这样了。
这样做可以吗，还是你希望我不要这样做？我们是否有道德义务通过在线服务提供的用户界面进行互动，还是我们可以自由地创建自己的方式？
也许，使用和滥用这些工具的便利性会使 HN 风格的投票及其结果页面排序变得不再具备信息价值。
查看原文
I'm using OpenClaw and a handful of prompts to generate a set of custom HN comment pages for myself each day. One page is from nice follows, another from users I find particularly detached from reality, and another for comments matching a list of topics, with sentiment indicators.<p>As a result of this filtration my impact as a voter on the site is amplified. Previously I may have seen one mention of topic X per day where now I see twenty. My voting criteria haven't changed but the volume has. I could always have manually searched, but that would be work, and now it isn't.<p>Is this fine, or would you rather I didn't? Is there an ethical obligation to interact with online services through their available UI, or are we free to make our own?<p>Maybe the ease of using and abusing such tools will make HN style voting, and the resulting page ordering, uninformative.