3 ms·
I voted to remain visible. I assume that resource is not a problem for YC. This fact, coupled with YC not having a search feature, leads me to believe that it
by superkarn 18y ago
I voted to remain visible.
I assume that resource is not a problem for YC. This fact, coupled with YC not having a search feature, leads me to believe that it's better for YC community that this site is indexed by more than just one search engine.
One big reason, as pointed out by Tichy, is that not all of us use Google as our primary search engine. By cutting off Yahoo, MSN, etc, but not Google, you would essentially be forcing us to use it to search the content of this site. Do that and you could be going down a slippery slope.
And I agree with the "ban all or ban none" mentality.
- yters 18y agoWhat's the slippery slope?
- superkarn 18y agoIt's a form of censorship, albeit a subtle one with possibly good reasons. That's reason I voted for "Remain visible to Yahoo, MSN search." Had option two been "Be invisible to all search engines.", then I would've voted for that one. But then YC would need to offer its own search.
- ntoshev 18y agoAt least two dimensions: - tying the site to specific products. pg may decide firefox browser is the best predictor for being a hacker and ban all other browsers. Would you like that? - introducing bias to the community. the search engine may be a correct predictor for being a hacker, but what about the false negtives: do we want to exclude the hackers working on MSN search engine from this community, for example? I certainly don't.
- yters 18y agoThat would be a problem if the decision is technology centered. But, it isn't. Technology is only incidental to making HN membership more challenging, and making a certain technology the de facto standard is anti-thetical to challenge. See why Fisher thinks chess is dead.