I disagree with the author. I know he's incredibly successful and right about pretty much everything he's ever said, but I've had some experience in this area and just finished reading through some of the archives and I think his focus is wrong. I'm going to ignore the technical issue and talk about the bigger picture and higher level things than what was said in the blog post. If the OP thinks that the process is most important, it's really about end results. But if he thinks it should be about the end results then he's an idiot for not thinking about the process. I'll weasel in a reference the startup I co-founded even though it's not directly relevant.
Continuing the discussion of point Z, here's an interesting way[1] it relates back to the OP. And here are some unknown facts[2] the OP didn't include.
But considering climate change, having people sized sidewalks and taxing the externalities of the process is really the point you failed to consider. Nuclear might work but there is a lot more to it that doesn’t get addressed in the article. Estonia really gets this correct and proves the point that the American city isn’t going to be well designed if we don’t consider the impact of the rail system and electrification.
Hi Hackernews! This is a little project I made in my free time. It's a fun and whimsical parody of Hacker News. I wanted to experiment with Faker.js and other JS libraries.
It randomly generates Hackernews headlines. You get new results each time you refresh the page. I spent about 4 days making this, and learned a lot in the process, and it was my first open source side project in a long time.
It was inspired by This Person Does Not Exist and other 'Does Not Exist' projects which you can find here: https://thisxdoesnotexist.com/
If you spot any bugs or have any ideas on maybe how to improve it, post your thoughts here.
The source code can be found on GitHub, where it's hosted:
I really wanted to get into Rust programming, but was turned off by the toxicity of the community. Their smug attitude of superiority really turns people away. I've been programming in C and C++ for decades, and I'm not sure I've ever once run into a problem with undefined behavior.
One thing I noticed that could be improved: The headlines in isolation are reasonable, and so are the websites, but the pairings between them are not. For example, "Snapchat Has Been Removed From iOS App Store (mitpress.mit.edu)" and "Hstr: Bash And Zsh Shell History Suggest Box (reuters.com)".
Here's a long detailed, objective explanation of everything related to this issue. It's probably more useful than the actual link and it may serve as one of the best efforts to consolidate information on this subject on the entire Internet. If it contains original research only a couple of readers will be qualified to tell. Half the people who upvote this won't understand more than the first two paragraphs.
Edit: I anticipated the potential questions and added more information. Add some graphs and this could be a master's thesis.
> high-level statement about a relevant side point
Here's how it really works. I'll write a couple paragraphs on all the exceptions I can think of, explaining how you should have said "often" instead of "almost always".
Fun fact, most of the type 1 diabetes looper scene (open source artificial pancreas) relies on an improperly secured insulin pump that allows third party software access via an exploit. The firmware has long been patched of course, but the pumps with the old firmware are still being sold among community members, for 4-5k.
A big block of text with no paragraph breaks. It seems like the author is trying his hardest to provide something insightful and well-written, and while it seems on-topic it is hard to relate to the original article. None of it looks wrong, but it doesn't seem very informative either. Most people will just skip right over it. There will be a semi-obscure Wikipedia link somewhere in here.[1]
Missing a random rachelbythebay or ACOUP post and an in-depth analysis of some medieval book collection also. (Though "The Scary Truth about Egypt" and "What to love about Small, Frozen Sausages" come pretty close)
I've seen this comment ever since I started reading Hacker News some 10 years ago. I've noticed myself getting warmed up to the argument over time, so I believe it's more an artifact of a user getting older than any real objective change in the site itself.
The necessary issue with gradual decline is that by definition there is never a point where you can definitively say it declined from one moment to the next. If you could, it wouldn't be a gradual decline, it would be a sudden decline.
Secondarily to this, if everywhere is in decline, there's no real way to tell as everything is relatively the same. In this context, HN is still ahead of reddit in terms of quality and content; reddit is still ahead of Facebook. Facebook and reddit however are very different beasts than they were a decade ago, let alone 15 years ago. Has HN had a similar decline as everywhere else? I don't really have a strong opinion on that, but it's a hard point to prove either way.
Personally, as someone that's been lurking HN since about 2010, the only differences that I can see is that HN seems less about startups than it was a decade ago and the comments are shorter and with less implicit good faith. The latter two though are happening everywhere, so I don't think HN is unique in that regard.
As an intellectual exercise, I went to a random date from the front page from 2009 and found someone complaining about Google's tracking and the degeneration of its search results:
You're right, which is the worst part of it; realizing you are part of the problem. I think the karma system is a big driver of it, you quickly learn what you "should" or "shouldn't" be posting.
An AI comment bot trained on past HN comments that can be unleashed on the actual HN to whore karma sounds like a great meta-humorous project - it would prove that as far as upvotes go, we have achieved the singularity.
If at the top of the list I see "Your appliance may be spying on you", it is not the platform that is a parody of itself - the farce is in this dragging world.
1. "New open-source project revolutionizes web development"
2. "10 tips for optimizing your website's performance"
3. "The future of programming languages: what to expect"
4. "Big tech companies accused of stifling innovation"
5. "The rise of artificial intelligence in the workplace"
6. "Successful startups share their secrets to growth"
7. "Why it's time to switch to a privacy-focused browser"
8. "The top programming languages to learn in 2021"
9. "How to build a strong cybersecurity strategy for your business"
10. "The importance of ethics in the tech industry"
IMHO it's a bit too clichée (there are rather few "10 tips to..." or "top XXX in 2021" on HN), but other than that, quite accurate.
EDIT: It seems like ChatGPT agreees:
> Can you do the same but less clichée?
1. "The surprising benefits of using a text-based interface"
2. "Exploring the potential of blockchain technology beyond cryptocurrency"
3. "Why the gig economy may not be sustainable in the long run"
4. "The role of virtual reality in distance learning"
5. "The future of work: how technology is changing the job market"
6. "The ethics of using facial recognition technology"
7. "How to protect your online identity from cyber threats"
8. "The potential of quantum computing to solve complex problems"
9. "The impact of automation on the job market"
10. "The rise of low-code development platforms"
While the headlines may not be real, many of these are totally worthy of Hacker News style conversations. Maybe we need a static version of this that we can add comments to?
This is definitely good for a laugh, on the first page-load. After that, some patterns emerge that really deflate the experience, but I definitely chuckled multiple times.
So are Reddit comments[1]. Once there are sufficient comments on the internet that you can't read them all in a lifetime, who's to say the one you are reading is novel and written by a human, and not a pre-fab comment scrambled from dozens of previous posts on the same topic from years ago, or the same topic on another site?
Haha, I always wanted to make one of these. Was going to call it Slacker News.
Amused by the way the random domains interact with the headlines (a NY Times exclusive on working every day for two years with Tailwind CSS, Microsoft blogging to say you may not need Svelte, Nature shilling Dogecoin)
Nothing. No gut bacteria this time, but they did have "In Praise of Tasty Wooden Salad", which is in line with Hackernews dietary recommendations if you don't want cancer, heart disease, violent mood swings, etc.
Suggestion: Remove the "#" from the href value or normalize the color style for a:visited. Otherwise if you click one link, they all change to the visited color and it's really hard to read.
This page brings fun twice: when you first load it and read the headlines, and next when you reload it a few times, see the pattern, and start to anticipate.
It technically has already been happening albeit on a smaller scale. It is frankly for the best in a sense that it will force mainstream to recognize it as an issue.
