I understand complaints for "not new or current" if the reader is expecting hacker _news_. But unless the expectations changed too much in last years this site is not necessarily about _news_ as it is about _information_.
If the link is worth it then the year is irrelevant. If it's not worth it, the year won't save it. Thus, adding the year just satisfies our appetite for novelty.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Similarly, the "[pdf]" and "[video]" tags are included in the guidelines:
If you submit a link to a video or pdf, please warn us by appending [video] or [pdf] to the title.
It sounds like you don't find it useful, which is fair enough. Do you find it harmful or misleading in some way? If so, how so?
Edit to add: Parent updated with additional rationale:
Mods adding the (publication year) is exactly like saying "hey, I've kind of read this, it's kind of old and you may (not) be interested in it because it's <years old>. I have no idea of the real value of the text but the year may give you a clue".
I think you're reading too much into it. For me, it just puts the post into chronological context. It doesn't give me the impression that it's any less worthwhile to read. In some cases, the year provides additional interest, particularly if it's older.