* Facts delivered with arbitrary fluff words is pointless even when written by a human - it obfuscates the
    real purpose which is the data
  * Companies pay humans to deliver articles in most cases and the bias of the writer or the institution
    that paid for it shines through. I cannot find a real difference between intentional angling by
    payment or by algorithm
  * When the day arises where computers could generate actually new, intelligent and thoughtful pieces I
    for one will be very interested in reading them. Sadly there would be millions of variations that could
    occur at an astounding pace. We'd then need algorithms to filter the generated content for the things
    that are really noteworthy.
  * News at its core is a sequence of facts which begs the question if we really need the cruft around
    those facts which can often lead to misinterpretation?