Hacker News is refreshingly constructive compared to other discussion forums. Seriously!
For example, the very popular German computer magazine c't has a news ticker where public contributions are allowed. Reading the comments there is extremely frustrating and depressing. Most posts almost always follow the same pattern: something in the news article is wrong or not clear enough, which is then complained about in a smug way. Next comes the wiseacre comments. If that's not enough, people express their own displeasure or negative view of something in connection with the article, in other words: rant. Keyboard warriors often have a rendezvous there. Information or constructive criticism is by now extremely rare there, at least compared to Hacker News. I've stopped reading the comments there!
...and that's exactly why I like being here and why I also enjoy reading your comments, because they often usefully complement the actual topic. :-)
It understands CSS, so it can show HN in its full orangeness :) Also, it has
color contrast correction by default, so downvoted comments are readable.
(If you enable JS, even thread collapsing works. But JS breaks upvoting,
because images are not supported yet and JS-enabled HN upvoting is implemented
using the Image constructor.)
w3m also works well with HN, but you have to enable images for comment nesting
to work. (Otherwise it ignores the spacer gifs.)
I guess I'm doing something wrong, but I installed it with pipx and it's saying "[Errno 8] nodename nor servname provided, or not known" when I launch it without loading any info.
I was somewhat reminded of Larry Wall's newsreader, 'rn', as I read the description of Orange Site Hit. I invested a lot of hours on Nutnews back in the day.
Personally, if a link sounds interesting, I go directly to the hn comments, and only rarely do I click the link itself.
This is the best comment section on the internet, not sure what there is to be frustrated about. (Thanks pg and dang for putting so much effort in keeping it this way!)
I do this about 60% of the time too. The comments are guaranteed to be a lightweight page and not ask me to approve cookies, notifications, etc as well.
But the comments do have a tendency to get off track or discuss topics not applicable to the original post. Still can be valuable to read, though.
I do the same. Maybe I’m just obtuse but I find this site to basically be the most civil, well meaning, and courteous place on the internet. Never understood the problems people have here.
Sometimes you'll see people comment on something you are more informed on (usually things outside tech) where the takes are just smart-sounding extrapolation but you don't have the mental fortitude to start a huge discussion under a comment that already veered into off-topic because you know there's a good change it'll be understood as starting a culture war mudfest (while the original comment usually is not, because there's either agreement or passive benefit of the doubt).
They're just weird moments where you notice how unreflected a usually very reflected, educated and measured community can be, and if you're personally affected by that category misinformation that can be quite annoying.
> This is the best comment section on the internet
> I generally dislike the culture there, it's almost impossible to read any of the comments without being frustrated about the industry I work in or am adjacent to and some of the people who inhabit it
Just because something is the best (or least bad) doesn't mean it is good.
Dang does a good job (for the longest time, my personal conspiracy theory was dang is not one person but like one of those names used by a whole team). However, if you remember the silicon valley bank saga, it is clear that the people here only talk the talk when it isn't their own money on the line. We ridicule the New York financial industry but look at the comments here about making ALL depositors/creditors whole in the comments and the panicked tweets Garry Tan put out. I can't even imagine the strings they must have pulled behind the scenes. I think their criticism is fairly tame.
Also, because of the nice firebase API, I think at this point writing a HN client is a rite of passage like print hello world (mine is in angular and performs terribly).
This leads to a lot of comments where someone clearly just read the title. These comments lack nuance and often make some argument that was already addressed by the author of the post.
If you are going to comment, then you should read the article. But most things posted here (especially by science and tech journalists) are not worth reading and you can get right to the actual information by looking at the comments. No need to read all that extra fluff from some content mill. If it still sounds interesting, then go read it.
> you can get right to the actual information by looking at the comments
There's a tragedy of the commons here, where the majority is going to the comments first without reading the article, expecting the other commenters to inform them about the article. Given this common practice, what makes you think you can get right to the actual information by looking at the comments? They're often less reliable than the articles themselves.
I don't see how that analogy applies. There is no depletable resource being exhausted.
There is a Nash equilibrium where experts and those who are interested read/know the topic of the article and write some commentary about it. The most insightful comments usually receive more upvotes from everyone (including non-readers). reading the top comments is thus generally a good timesave to risk of being misinformed tradeoff that many users have decided to be worth taking.
Being less reliable can be acceptable if it reduces the time to read by 10x or more.
It depends on the topic, certainly. For technical and non-controversial subjects I believe it can be relied on. If it fails, the damage is usually low.
HN, Reddit, and sites alike have an extremely awkward relationship with "content mills."
They're link aggregators, so threads start from links. But nobody reads the linked articles, they only head the "headline." In other words, the headline is the title of the thread, and the comments are a discussion starting from that title.
So what is the linked content? From the user's perspective, the linked article is just another comment. Which for users somehow make sense. The "author" is just an user with a site making a comment on a topic on their own website, while the thread are users without their own websites making comments on the same topic. If a single "comment" is just somebody's opinion, then it's highly likely most "are not worth reading," including the linked article.
So why is the link necessary in first place then? It certainly doesn't feel like it's needed. You could make a social media where to start a new thread you just type the topic and that's enough. We could also have the extreme opposite: we could have a social media where you also just type the topic to start a thread, but all "comments" must be links to articles.
I wonder if there's a social media like that. It would be interesting to compare what the threads look like.
They aren't seeking information. They are seeking drama and attention. A thread has many users (eyeballs) looking at it, talking about things. If it's drama they want they may find it in the comments. If it's attention they want they may engage with the users in the comments like they would be able to in a chat room.
The easiest way to get someone to actually read your hot takes isn't to post it on Twitter where you have no followers but to reply in a tangential and practically non-sequitur way to someone in a thread where there's a lot of eyeballs looking at the comments. You know, exactly the way I'm doing right now.
HN is a giant echo chamber. Some people dislikes any and all echo chamber, regardless of the bias. And then you have people disliking the slant of HN's echo chamber as well.
To put it another way, HN as a whole has strong opinions on a lot of things. And anyone or anything with strong opinions will have people disliking them, for better or worse :-)
It's important to be self-aware enough that every group has its own groupthink, HN is no exception, and to know the thought bubble you occupy when you're in that group.
I see it as a giant argument chamber. You can't say the "sky is blue" without someone asking you for sources or ackchually-ing you because an eclipse darkens the sky, etc. People deliberately take the most disingenuous reading of commentary and respond to it to make the poster look as stupid or insecure as possible. I can't see how that is an echo chamber. (and I see the irony in opposing your statement here, while making the claim that most comments are disagreements). I will concede, however, that certain topics (teslas, apple, among others) there is a hive mind that will downvote viciously if you hit a nerve.
Those arguments are just another echo chamber where the echoing content itself is meta rather than specific. So instead of "X is Y", it's more like "you should use method Z to determine whether X is Y".
It's just the same breed of "correlation is not causation", "more critical thinking is needed", or "citation needed" as you mentioned.
I'll probably get downvotes for telling the truth, but whatever, it deserves to be said even if folks only see it for a few hours.
Our industry is still full of sexism and racism. Yes, things have gotten better. But most women in our industry can still tell you disturbing stories. We still have a long way to go.
HN is a generally going to reflect our industry. Some days are better than others here and it really depends on the topic. But it's pretty disappointing when you do come across some blatant sexism or racism and folks agree with it. PG himself is occasionally an angry privileged man moaning about the woke mob so it's no surprise not much has changed here over the decades. The owners like it this way. PG and Dang also get a lot right about how to run a site like this. Both can be true.
> Our industry is still full of sexism and racism.
Im curious what people like you want. If you look at the rest of the world, the west seems like it is decades ahead with this sort of stuff than anyone else in the world. And social change on national scales don't happen overnight. Yes improvements can be made, but HN is a site focussed on technology and that is what is mostly discussed. If some sexism or racism or whatever slips through, thats just the world we live in today. If you look at the youth today, they are already much more accommodating towards diverse views. Just give the world time and you'll see on average things will get better. But forcing your views onto people who grew up differently than you is just annoying.
[edit] when saying "people like you" I am refering to the highly vocal inflexible people on the interwebs.
> the west seems like it is decades ahead with this sort of stuff
"The west"?
Ok, so when is the US going to become part of the west?
The previous elected president of the United States believes that because he's privileged - by virtue of being a nepobaby - he can "grab women by the pussy", with no consequences.
So you tell me, what do "people like [us] want"? Do you really have no idea?
> Ok, so when is the US going to become part of the west?
I'm from Africa. Here "the west" is an expression refering to europe and the US and/or advanced democratic countries. I thought it was a common expression, I apologize if I was unclear.
> The previous elected president of the United States believes that because he's privileged - by virtue of being a nepobaby...
Trump doesn't act the way he does "because he is priveledged by virtue of being a nepobaby". He acts that way, because he is old and grew up in times where acting that way was socially accepted. In modern times it is not accepted and people are growing up knowing it is wrong.
The point of my post was basically that preaching to a tech focussed website full of mostly middle aged men is the wrong strategy. If you want to make a difference, go to the youth and don't expect change to happen overnight.
In the corpus of global communities this tends to be an extremely accepting and courteous one, from what I can tell over the last 13 years being on here.
Don't be insane. You know what we want, and that's an end to sexism and racism. I don't care how we compare to other countries, I care how we rank on the "are we sexist or racist at all" metric.
Honestly, your question is one of the worst I have ever read, because it insinuates that you think it's ok to still be racist and sexist as long as we're less racist and sexist than others. We're not less racist or sexist than anyone else in the world, for one thing, so the premise for your complaint is baseless, and the amount of racism and sexism that is acceptable is zero, no matter where you are in the world.
A website to discuss interesting things in thoughtful way that is largely free from sexism, ageism, and racism.
> the west seems like it is decades ahead with this sort of stuff
Some countries treated slaves better than other countries. Hopefully you can agree there was still a big problem to fix.
> social change on national scales don't happen overnight
Sure. And I'll be impatient and insistent until I live in the kind of world I want, which is one that is free as practically as possible from sexism, ageism, racism and other bias that keeps us from achieving what we are truly capable of as a species.
> If you look at the youth today, they are already much more accommodating towards diverse views
Which is why many of them avoid this site and call it "The Orange Site".
> Just give the world time and you'll see on average things will get better
I already said things are getting better. I also don't have time. I'm old. And the oppressed themselves have no patience. Nor should they.
> forcing your views onto people who grew up differently than you is just annoying
Who here is forcing their views on people who grew up differently?
If the price to pay for a better world is that I have to annoy some people who want to maintain the status quo, I am more than willing to pay that price. I wish it were actually that easy.
A lot of users don't seem to recognize racism or sexism when it is not directed at them. This leads them to think it is not a problem.
If you point out something specific, some users will double down on their view that nothing is wrong. They start arguing as if they know nothing, and demand that every detail must be elaborated to them on a silver platter.
Oh, and the demands for stats.
Nevermind that the social sciences are in their infancy, and largely incapable of measuring the effects of things such as racism and sexism.
Science itself is the equivalent of a toddler - it is systematic (step by step), not systemic (whole picture). Reality is made of interconnected systems, and both perspectives are required to understand reality.
yea see I run my own business and I don't consider the gender or race of people applying (aka not racist/sexist)
> It's hard to even find women to interview, let alone hire.
from my perspective this is a subtle admission of active positive discrimination on your part, frankly if i was a woman maybe i would find it a little off putting that a bunch of old guys were real keen to get me under their supervision
if there is a movement to get men into nursing, it's not nearly as vocal (and why would there be?)
Ok, you still have zero experience in our industry, per your own words. And it shows.
> I don't consider the gender or race of people applying (aka not racist/sexist)
So you're ok with reinforcing any existing sexism and racism in the pipeline.
I'll give you a concrete example. We have to choose a speaker for our tech conference. All else being equal the tie-breaker will be to choose the person with the most speaking experience. Can you see how you've possibly and probably just reinforced existing sexism? I would guess you cannot see it.
> a subtle admission of active positive discrimination on your part
Nah. I usually don't have a say about who gets into the hiring pipeline. And when I have had a say I've always talked to recruiters about qualifications not gender or race. So you got that wrong.
> frankly if i was a woman maybe i would find it a little off putting that a bunch of old guys were real keen to get me under their supervision
You should speak to some actual women so you can correct your bad guesses.
A bunch of old guys? What makes you think they are guys or old?
Keen to get someone under their supervision? You sound creepy.
Please keep fighting the good fight. There are a lot of people here who appreciate it.
I've noticed an increased level of bigoted comments, and downvotes on progressive comments, since the middle of this year. I don't know if it's linked to reddit's stupidity, but the trolls/assholes have been more active lately.
Perpetuating flamewars like this is not ok on HN, regardless of how bad someone else's comments are or you feel they are. If you'd please make your substantive points thoughtfully instead, we'd appreciate it.
You've repeatedly broken the site guidelines in this thread, including crossing into personal attack. That's not cool, regardless of how bad someone else's comments are or you feel they are. If you'd please make your substantive points thoughtfully instead, we'd appreciate it.
Regarding the dislike of HN comments: while I understand how following the discussions can be frustrating sometimes, I still appreciate the level of moderation and sheer volume of relatively-well-written comments. I may disagree with them, or get triggered, but at least they were written with intent.
Unlike HN, most of high-traffic forums on the public web today have low-effort comments populating discussions, thinks like tired jokes, emojis, puns, etc.
Oh yea agreed, and I admit I’m often at fault for this as well. Some topics I tend to have an instant emotional reaction to and leave low quality ragebaiting comments - it’s hard to unlearn a decade of being trained to respond like this on places like facebook.
Lately I strive to get better and often type out a comment, wait a minute reread it and then close the window. Often it’s best to just shut up.
Entrepreneurs have an empathy for one another that can have many aspects -- stoic philosophy, self-reliance, resourcefulness, resilience, motivating oneself and those around one. Founders have less time for banality)
I don't personally see the use in a version of a link aggregator where you can't click on the links. In fact I don't see the use in a terminal version of a website. It's basically just a UI downgrade. TUIs are a combination of the worst parts of terminal and GUI software.
> I generally dislike the culture there, it's almost impossible to read any of the comments without being frustrated about the industry I work in or am adjacent to and some of the people who inhabit it;
From time to time I read (unsubstantiated) comments like that line from this post but I really fail to understand what are the expectations.
The only "culture" I see in HN are the guidelines, sort of a constitution in order to avoid problems that appear on other platforms. What's wrong with that ? Of course you are going to find people you don't agree with for many reasons just like... in the real world.
Now if you're talking about the demographics, well sure, a lot of people working with computers, but that's only a homogeneous population depending on the level you are looking at it.
This is where I fail to understand the expectations. I don't come to HN to be part of a homogeneous culture of people who think like me and validate me, I come here to read the wide variety of (substantiated) takes and learn about cool stuff.
For example, the very popular German computer magazine c't has a news ticker where public contributions are allowed. Reading the comments there is extremely frustrating and depressing. Most posts almost always follow the same pattern: something in the news article is wrong or not clear enough, which is then complained about in a smug way. Next comes the wiseacre comments. If that's not enough, people express their own displeasure or negative view of something in connection with the article, in other words: rant. Keyboard warriors often have a rendezvous there. Information or constructive criticism is by now extremely rare there, at least compared to Hacker News. I've stopped reading the comments there!
...and that's exactly why I like being here and why I also enjoy reading your comments, because they often usefully complement the actual topic. :-)