7 ms·
Is HN dieing?
So, being in HN for almost a decade(not with this user though) I saw a huge decline not only in the quality, but also I've saw some people claiming there's censorship around and suddenly less and lesser upvotes, less interesting content... not to mention that back then, being in a startup was something great, nowadays it's frowned upon. Are we starting at the end, or just a new phase?
- techno_modus 9y agoEntropy grows. Quantity of information drops. Interestingness falls. Is not it a natural process?
- qwerty1989 9y agoI would love to see an overview on their top page. it would bring a lot of transparency.
- warrenm 9y agoI've found HN better in the last year or so than at any point since its inception
- mkempe 9y agoHow many PG essays have been published and/or discussed here in the last 12 months?
- warrenm 9y agodunno but it hasn't mattered to me :)
- smt88 9y agoWho cares? I've found articles better than PG's best essays on at least a weekly basis. There are billions to choose from -- losing PG isn't going to make much of a dent. Also, his last essays that I can remember, defending wealth inequality, were uninformed rbagege and (rightly) excoriated on HN and the wider media.
- mkempe 9y agoI don't see you having submitted the "better" articles to HN -- can you provide a list of such articles you have found so frequently, let's say for the last 12 weeks? Incidentally, your comment seems rather hostile towards the man who founded YC, created HN, and set the original quality and tone of this online community.
- smt88 9y agoI don't care to provide them. You're welcome to disagree. My comment certainly is hostile toward PG. He isn't God. I don't have to worship him, even if I'm on his site. Do you think reddit has no discussions critical of its founders?. PG or the mods are free to kick me off if my comments about him bother them.
- mindcrime 9y agoI find the exact opposite. Over the past year there's been way too much politics, too much anti-business hoopla, too much general news that you can find anywhere, too much negativity, and generally less focus on interesting hacker oriented stuff. This site really as become "Hacker" News in name only. It's now heavily populated by a lot of people who didn't grow up immersed in the hacker ethos, and who don't share the values, traits and attitudes that have defined that community over the years.
- warrenm 9y ago>heavily populated by a lot of people who didn't grow up immersed in the hacker ethos, and who don't share the values, traits and attitudes that have defined that community over the years IOW - it's growing. That is neither good nor bad on its own. It just is. Communities change through time - for better, worse, and neutral.
- enkiv2 9y agoI mean, being anti-business is a huge part of the hacker ethos. The whole pro-startup thing being associated with hackers at all is pretty new. So, by returning to anti-business sentiments, HN returns to the hacker ethos of ~1994.
- mindcrime 9y agoI mean, being anti-business is a huge part of the hacker ethos. FWIW, I never really saw it that way... my perception was that it was more of an "anti BIG business" and "anti proprietary / locked-down / walled garden ecosystem" sentiment. But that's not the same as business per-se. Lots of hackers started businesses and even rms says that selling software for money is fine, so long as user freedom is preserved. That said, you have a fair point about the startup/hacker "thing" being a little more modern. Then again, 1994 was a pretty long time ago now. So I guess one could argue the point about whether that should be accepted as part of the hacker ethos or not at this point.
- warrenm 9y ago
- marmalade92 9y agoan analysis on the top page with time machine would be very interesting people..
- mindcrime 9y agonot to mention that back then, being in a startup was something great, nowadays it's frowned upon Yeah, there's been a very notable shift here, in terms of the zeitgeist formerly being very pro-business, pro-startup, pro-innovation, and generally positive; and now the zeitgeist being very negative, cynical, anti-business, etc. Not to say that there aren't still voices on both ends of that spectrum, but the prevailing sentiment has clearly shifted. I wouldn't say HN is "dying" but it's not the same site it used to be. I attribute that largely to a change in the composition of the community. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is a question I'll leave for the philosophers.
- PaulHoule 9y agoI don't know if I would quite put it that way, but I do remember techno-libertarianism being the dominant paradigm on HN at the beginning and for more leftish views to become common over time.
- smt88 9y ago> being in a startup was something great, nowadays it's frowned upon I've noticed this change, and it's one of my favorite things about HN. There are fewer naive people trumpeting the "accomplishment" of raising money. There are more people advising young devs not to work for equity. Why should we worship the idea of a startup? Startups are not noble in and of themselves. The vast majority are just a form of gambling that only wealthy people can safely afford[1][2]. As Peter Lynch said, "An investment is simply a gamble in which you've managed to tilt the odds in your favor." But a startup is never in your favor -- even if you're convinced they are[3][4]. There's still a huge amount of luck and social capital that's required, beyond just having the right product and market. Even hyper-successful founders like Biz Stone have gone on to start failures. To prove that startups are a gamble, look at VC firms. All but a few are money-losing operations because even they can't predict who will succeed -- and it's all they're supposed to be good at![5] I think the US is changing (for the better) in the sense that capitalist ideals, like startups, aren't blindly worshiped anymore. People ask whether we actually need another to-do app to raise $10M. To me, that's a very welcome change. 1. https://qz.com/455109/entrepreneurs-dont-have-a-special-gene-for-risk-they-come-from-families-with-money/ https://qz.com/455109/entrepreneurs-dont-have-a-special-gene... 2. https://techcrunch.com/2015/02/08/startups-a-rich-mans-game/ https://techcrunch.com/2015/02/08/startups-a-rich-mans-game/ 3. https://smallbiztrends.com/2016/11/startup-statistics-small-business.html https://smallbiztrends.com/2016/11/startup-statistics-small-... 4. "A company accepted by Y Combinator, therefore, has less than a 1-in-10 chance of being a big success." http://www.businessinsider.com/startup-odds-of-success-2013-5 http://www.businessinsider.com/startup-odds-of-success-2013-... 5. https://hbr.org/2014/08/venture-capitalists-get-paid-well-to-lose-money https://hbr.org/2014/08/venture-capitalists-get-paid-well-to... > I saw a huge decline not only in the quality This is pretty subjective. I still see lots of amazing, fascinating comments from domain experts and people who are close to stories. > claiming there's censorship around There have been moderation experiments, like banning politics for a short time, but I don't know what else you're talking about. I haven't seen anyone claim they're being censored, except a few people who are posting truly awful stuff.
- mindcrime 9y agoThere are fewer naive people trumpeting the "accomplishment" of raising money. There are more people advising young devs not to work for equity. Yes, but it feels like we've thrown the baby out with the bathwater. Less promoting raising money as an accomplishment in and of itself is a Good Thing in my book (I've actually written on this very topic). But it feels like we've gone beyond that to a place where innovation, solving hard problems, creating new things, building new businesses, etc., are denigrated. People ask whether we actually need another to-do app to raise $10M. To me, that's a very welcome change. That's a fair point, but I feel like the change is much broader than that. It's not just "why do we need this new to-do app" but closer to "startups are evil in general" here lately. You see a lot of anti-capitalist bullshit and generally anti-business sentiment on here over the past couple of years. And given the historical background of this site, that's a pretty major change.
- mkempe 9y agoPG's excellent essays and the attached discussions were a huge positive. They drew a good audience and helped elevate the discourse. The new leadership is less intellectual, less inspiring, more inclined to politics. O tempora, o mores.
- dmschulman 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September