I mean bitcoin stories are not like constantly seeing the latest bimbo in the regular news right?
Personally I upvote (some) bitcoin stories because I think it's something new and innovative and shows hackers being creative in engineering their own world.
Then again, adding tags to HN would be a wonderful way to allow everyone to personalize their filtering if desired and an easy way to search too. For those that do not want tags at all, a simple checkbox in profile could hide all tag interfaces, or just use a CSS class that is easily hidden.
Personally I think one should only upvote for the content of the link, not for raping the front page because one think some topic is more interesting than others.
Keep them coming. I would rather read that than that Pandora/Groupon filed for an IPO, the latest marketing driven from Joel/Atwood/37 Signals, or Techcrunch's reblogging of WSJ/AP/Reuters.
Using an extension to hide the stories is ignoring them. It's just automated and highly efficient.
I understand that they have no interest in them, however I don't think it's such a burden to just skip over stories you don't want to read.
Well, when you consider that Hacker News was called Startup News when I first became aware of it,
I think that misses out on a lot of the history that made this site what it is today.
Regarding the old name of the site, you did spur me to look up the dates involved (definitely before I got here, which was maybe a few years ago):
"The site was created by Paul Graham in February 2007. Initially it was called Startup News or occasionally News.YC. On August 14, 2007 it became known by its current name."
I'm not saying there's no reason to be interested in Bitcoin other than personal financial motives. The technology is legitimately interesting, but not nearly enough to have gotten the marketing push that it's gotten, particularly here. Only one thing explains that: the selfish incentives that the current implementation of Bitcoin provides. (Well, or extremist ideology.)
Normally, I'd think that he personally had all those stories posted for vanity, but most of them were not exactly flattering. My next best explanation is that it was intended to build brand recognition for his name. Well, it worked: I recognized the name when I recently saw him on in TV playing Poker...
I lifted a dataset from http://hackerslide.com which has hourly archived front pages. With that and some dumb regular expressions I categorized stories and how much time that story stayed on the front page. That is, two bitcoin posts on four different front-pages in a day would be 8 'story-hours'.
I'm sure this way of measuring has problems such as different times having different amount of activity on HN.
To me it seems like there are constantly 1+ bitcoin posts on the front-page everyday. Most of the time the posts are about some trivial event (bitcoin hits 8.5 on mtgox, EFF starts accepting bitcoins, EFF stops accepting bitcoins) or a blog post that discusses bitcoin. In all of these circumstances the discussion seems to follow the same trends and go over the same ground. If there is ever a truly novel insight it would be hard to find in the mess.
The rest seems to be driven by speculators, and possibly borders on something like a pump and dump scheme to drive the price up so the speculators can make more money, at the expense of the later participants who fall for the hype.
First is (subjective) oversaturation. It's like the days when there's some announcement or scandal involving Apple, and you know that for the next little while this is all you're going to see. After a while it's just "oh, another Bitcoin story?"
Second is that it seems to turn off the rational-thinking centers of many brains. You end up with lots and lots of threads full of people who either A) once read a Neal Stephenson novel and now are convinced this is the Crypt (it's not) and the Black Chamber dudes are coming any minute (they aren't) or B) are being hit hard by the Dunning-Kruger effect and think they know more about economics or world politics than they actually do.
Third is that, well, it's pretty boring. OK, you made an alternative currency. This is not new. The specific selection of buzzwords around this alternate currency is new, but that in itself isn't really something that gets me excited, and in fact I think that's more of a turnoff, if only because my experience has been that the more buzzwords you pile on (decentralized peer-to-peer non-fiat non-inflationary alternative currency with hard crypto anonymization!), the less likely you are to actually have an interesting product.
(and fourth is that sooner or later somebody's probably going to blow it wide open, security-wise, but that's neither here nor there)
Bitcoin seems like a legitimate attempt to move currency into the future absent of any one entity controlling it.
Edit: I'm not being snarky, I haven't followed this that closely and wondered if there was/is a political component to Bitcoin that connects those dots.
marypoppins = ( superman + starship ) / god;
We reside in a world controlled by a collection of political forces. Money is the primary lever by which pressure is exerted in order to execute political policy.
I am not an enormous Ayn Rand fan, however there were a few parts of Atlas Shrugged I really did find very eye opening. The effete playboy of the series had a good one that I'll briefly include here to outline the importance of the core issue as it relates to the subtle strings of force in our political existence;
"So you think that money is the root of all evil?" said Francisco d'Aconia. "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?
I still find the use of terms like moochers and looters loaded, but the core point is extremely potent. Money is the primary friendly lever in modern society, it is the primary incentive for production. For this reason alone, the ways in which bitcoin can upset the apple cart should be thoroughly considered and not simply discarded offhand.
People objecting to bitcoin are making a cursory glance at it and it hits one of their suspicion triggers and they instantly discard it; Enriches early adopters? Aha, must be a ponzi scheme, no need to dig deeper here.
There are far more interesting objections that are actually bounded in the fabric of what is real rather than a cursory glance and misunderstanding of what is seen. What about an execution of the age old idea of assassination politics with bitcoin as the medium of exchange? If you really want to fearmonger, think hard about what might actually happen when the primary lever of society is completely immune to government. This is both frightening in some ways and exhilerating in others.
How about superfluid buying and selling agencies run by speculators that contract to traders exchanging local fiat currencies for bitcoins on the wire and instantly back to local fiat for the receiver at the end, reducing exposure for the merchant and buyer and abstraction from the messy cryptographic details of the implementation and enabling the speculators, as well as providing hefty profits for the administrators of such agents, in turn incentivising an enormous bazaar of such agents to exist in a huge snowball effect that makes regulation even more of a distant, ridiculous idea.
Think about it, really, really hard. This has already changed the world, the only question now is how will the chips fall. It is exactly appropriate that it should get a lot of attention here.
[Related: @lulzsec just soliciated BTC donations to fund further Sony hacks.]
Those trading with btc just want a fast digital medium of exchange, they have taken to pricing their goods and services in a local fiat currency with more stability than btc (which is pretty much anything with the extreme market swings in btc right now) and a proviso that the conversion will be done at the time of the transaction. So, effectively they are simply treating BTC like cash. Due to the superfluidity of the exchange itself they can afford to ignore the actual exchange rate.
Those trading in btc are hoarding it with the expectation that the price will rise as scarcity increases due to other people speculating in it as well as the network hash rate of the mining effort spiralling upward.
These two points taken together was the core of my hypothetical idea about buying / selling agents that are effectively exchanges coupled with merchant service providers. It reflects the reality on the ground and plays well with both sectors of the market.
Just to answer the obvious points also, something you can print on your inkjet when you're twelve is also printable by any other inkjet holder. The BTC in your account are unique and the total supply of BTC is expanded by a well understood mathematical process at a predictable rate and distribution, not fiat declaration of a central bank. This is what is meant by bitcoin is not a fiat currency.
I also have enlightening perspective changing quotations from jesuits saved up just in case, and I am a militant atheist.
I guess I'm just weird like that. :)
What a goofy, insecure reaction.
> It is as revolutionary to money (the concept, perhaps not the implementation as yet) as mp3 was to music, or blogs to writers.
The difference between concept and implementation is also the difference between fantasy and reality.
"People that don't have the money to buy bitcoins and see them appreciate are jealous of the ones that do. They hide their insufficiency and jealousy by calling it a ponzi scheme or scam, so they can simultaneously feel superior to the bitcoiners whilst tricking themselves into thinking they wouldn't buy them anyway even if they had the money.
It'd also be a fear that one day they'd have to work on a bitcoin project, which would be rubbing salt in the wounds.
Fact is, there are tons of hackers that could contribute a lot to the bitcoin ecosystem, but they take the negative route instead: they don't want to give anyone a free ride (or they like their rut.)
I could go on, but there are some anti-Israel type tones in the anti-bitcoin brigade, that's my feeling when I write anything positive about bitcoin: I may as well write something positive about Israel.
For many, bitcoin.org is the startup, and buying the currency is the investment. People would upvote any story about their startup, and they'd upvote anything about bitcoin. It's a fair thing to do.
Bitcoin is an extremely hacker-ish thing. It is a hack on the money supply. It is as revolutionary to money (the concept, perhaps not the implementation as yet) as mp3 was to music, or blogs to writers. It has hugely positive implications, so people that hate it, will Really hate it."
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ for(var index = 0; index < tds.length; index++)
td.getAttribute('class').indexOf('title') != -1 &&
td.firstChild.tagName == 'A' &&
var tr1 = td.parentNode;
var tr2 = tr1.nextSibling;
To be honest, I'm not really guaranteeing the date. Calling bubble dates is virtually impossible by their very nature. But that we're in one, yes I would be willing to stand by that. I actually hope something like BitCoin succeeds at some point, but I don't see it being BitCoin.
Are all Safari extensions this complex?
For the record, document.querySelectorAll() is built-in and can do selector matching, and the only other thing you use Zepto for (adding classes) is trivially done manually.
But I still find it silly.. Just don't click on stories that don't interest you. heh
Follow HN (http://archfinch.com/tag/hn), block startups, (http://archfinch.com/tag/startups), windows8 (http://archfinch.com/tag/windows8), then subscribe to your personal RSS feed.
Perhaps I could make it into an extension.
also, i've periodically been popping in to read the comments in Chrome or on iHackerNews.com
Why not make a general purpose filter?
Woah, wait, what? Even if everything else you said is right (and if nothing else, these guys are shady), Mtgox has done a volume of 38825BTC in the last 24 hours -- that's a volume of $411541 today. (At the current rate, which means it's probably more like $380k, but whatever)
(I don't use Safari myself, but...)