What the article is saying is:

"the author (pilot?) hasn't generally thought too much about the problem space, and so there isn't really much of a discussion to be had. The cool part about pre-AI show HN is you got to talk to someone who had thought about a problem for way longer than you had. It was a real opportunity to learn something new, to get an entirely different perspective."

I think the valuable learning experience can be what makes a Show HN worth viewing, if it's worth viewing. (I don't feel precious about it though.. I didn't think Show HN was particularly engaging before AI either)