5 ms·

> i submitted a link ... about an hour ago, and after > watching it depressingly fall off the first page of > the new list, i think i'm giving up on ever s

> i submitted a link ... about an hour ago, and after > watching it depressingly fall off the first page of > the new list, i think i'm giving up on ever submitting > a link to HN again. > What's so frustrating is that i can identify content > that is good, and relevant (the link above is about > open data, citizen access to data, and information > management), which are obviously relevant to the > hacker news community. Maybe it's just me, but I submit that you are mistaken. For example, I saw it, and it is of zero interest to me. I write code for a living, I manage people who write code, I run two companies, one of which produces code, and I don't think it's of interest. That doesn't mean it's of zero interest to everyone. That doesn't mean it should be of zero interest to everyone. It does mean that you are mistaken in your belief that founders and hackers would be interested, if only they'd seen it.

knowtheory 16y ago
I appreciate the POV. At the risk of litigating a separate issue, i think you're wrong. Aside from people who care about big data, information gathering and management by the government is a big deal for journalists, people who interact with the government, and ultimately tax payers. You're going to fall into at least one of those categories, and i think that hackers in particular are going to fall into multiple of those categories (that i happen to know from personal experience). But if you didn't think it was relevant, then i certainly don't think you're obligated to upvote. :)
- RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
  I think you misunderstand me. What the Government does with your data, and what it doesn't do, is big news, of great interest, to everyone. And that's my point. It should be of interest to everyone, and it's got nothing specifically related to being a hacker, being a founder, running a project, or other technical issues that are the point, purpose and focus of this community. Or once were. And before someone trots out the "satisfies intellectual curiosity" line from the guidelines let me just say no, it doesn't, and if you think it does then you have a very different concept of "intellectual" from mine. So I'm not saying it's uninteresting in general, I'm saying it's uninteresting to this community as I understand it ought to be. And in consequence it's clear that you have a different understanding about with this community ought to be. Maybe I'm now out-of-date, and it's changed into something with which I don't share significant overlap.
  - knowtheory 16y ago
    Well, i note that we joined hacker news within 40 days of each other. Given that, i'd hazard to say we at least have some similar sense of what the community is (although obviously there's an element of self selection in terms of what we read and contribute to). At the same time, if you don't find the generalist argument persuasive, i'd fall back on the point i skipped previously, which is that this is of direct interest to data geeks. One of the major information brokers, which is interesting both as an individual instance, and as a representative of all large information brokers is fundamentally broken internally. This is a data processing and scaling issue laid out in a way that should make us ask what's wrong, and what it is that can be done to fix these sorts of problems. Put more succinctly, this is a problem in our domain.
- rhizome 16y ago
  information gathering and management by the government is a big deal for journalists, people who interact with the government, and ultimately tax payers I think you're getting into a long-deplored mailing-list tendency for people to ascribe general attributes to their community based on personal preference. "I like ice-cream, lots of other people probably like ice cream, so it's a good post for HN." Journalistic feature-creep, if you will. My point being that yes, we are all tax-payers more or less, but that doesn't mean everything paid for with tax revenues is germane. Syllogistic posting rationales tend to cast a wider and wider umbrella, sometimes venturing into the realm of slippery slopes. EDIT: fixed quote-italics
  - knowtheory 16y ago
    Actually, i typically err far on the other side. There are many pieces of information that i read hours or days before they appear here or in other social media aggregators, and that has lead me to the impression that i should be contributing more. Additionally, i do feel that i have some sense of the hacker news demographic having both been a part of it, and watching the sort of content that does generate discussion. So i'm cognizant of the problem, and i'd like to think that gives me at least some ability to compensate from the bias.

knowtheory 16y ago

I appreciate the POV. At the risk of litigating a separate issue, i think you're wrong. Aside from people who care about big data, information gathering and management by the government is a big deal for journalists, people who interact with the government, and ultimately tax payers. You're going to fall into at least one of those categories, and i think that hackers in particular are going to fall into multiple of those categories (that i happen to know from personal experience). But if you didn't think it was relevant, then i certainly don't think you're obligated to upvote. :)

RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
I think you misunderstand me. What the Government does with your data, and what it doesn't do, is big news, of great interest, to everyone. And that's my point. It should be of interest to everyone, and it's got nothing specifically related to being a hacker, being a founder, running a project, or other technical issues that are the point, purpose and focus of this community. Or once were. And before someone trots out the "satisfies intellectual curiosity" line from the guidelines let me just say no, it doesn't, and if you think it does then you have a very different concept of "intellectual" from mine. So I'm not saying it's uninteresting in general, I'm saying it's uninteresting to this community as I understand it ought to be. And in consequence it's clear that you have a different understanding about with this community ought to be. Maybe I'm now out-of-date, and it's changed into something with which I don't share significant overlap.
- knowtheory 16y ago
  Well, i note that we joined hacker news within 40 days of each other. Given that, i'd hazard to say we at least have some similar sense of what the community is (although obviously there's an element of self selection in terms of what we read and contribute to). At the same time, if you don't find the generalist argument persuasive, i'd fall back on the point i skipped previously, which is that this is of direct interest to data geeks. One of the major information brokers, which is interesting both as an individual instance, and as a representative of all large information brokers is fundamentally broken internally. This is a data processing and scaling issue laid out in a way that should make us ask what's wrong, and what it is that can be done to fix these sorts of problems. Put more succinctly, this is a problem in our domain.
rhizome 16y ago
information gathering and management by the government is a big deal for journalists, people who interact with the government, and ultimately tax payers I think you're getting into a long-deplored mailing-list tendency for people to ascribe general attributes to their community based on personal preference. "I like ice-cream, lots of other people probably like ice cream, so it's a good post for HN." Journalistic feature-creep, if you will. My point being that yes, we are all tax-payers more or less, but that doesn't mean everything paid for with tax revenues is germane. Syllogistic posting rationales tend to cast a wider and wider umbrella, sometimes venturing into the realm of slippery slopes. EDIT: fixed quote-italics
- knowtheory 16y ago
  Actually, i typically err far on the other side. There are many pieces of information that i read hours or days before they appear here or in other social media aggregators, and that has lead me to the impression that i should be contributing more. Additionally, i do feel that i have some sense of the hacker news demographic having both been a part of it, and watching the sort of content that does generate discussion. So i'm cognizant of the problem, and i'd like to think that gives me at least some ability to compensate from the bias.