4 ms·

You guys flagged this? That is not the move of a vibrant, growing, confident community. I’m no fan of the Rust jihad myself, but this isn’t spam or hate speech

You guys flagged this? That is not the move of a vibrant, growing, confident community. I’m no fan of the Rust jihad myself, but this isn’t spam or hate speech or whatever. That is a super weak move.

robonerd 5y ago
Flagging articles that criticize popular tools seems to be common. Particularly so with Go specifically.
- jeroenhd 5y ago
  Go and Rust seem to have some of the most rabid fan bases of all programming languages and this article mentions both. A perfect HN storm. I think all the arguments against Go in this article are fair and I think you can write articles just as long about any programming language of your choosing. It's very strange to see the level professional programmers will stoop to if their favourite tool gets criticised. The fanboys of programming languages are the worst part of a language community. The "why not rewrite it in Rust" and the "you're golanging it wrong" crowds only drive people away from their respective languages.
otterley 5y ago
Right now our only mechanism to indicate that we don't think a post is appropriate is to flag it. We don't have the ability to downvote posts that we don't feel meet the quality bar for being featured on HN.
- sigzero 5y ago
  Why is it flagged then? It is clearly an appropriate posting.
  - otterley 5y ago
xiphias2 5y ago
I guess it's because it's not anything that hasn't been said before. Go is easy to start with and gets harder as you debug deep problems. Rust is very hard to start, then it gets easier over time. This has been said in many other threads, and we all know it's true.
- victoryhb 5y ago
  So the reason for the censorship is they read the entire article and saw nothing "new" about something you "all know is true"? That's indeed a "new" way to discourage reasoned discussions.
  - xiphias2 5y ago
    Dang explained it many times, that HN is optimized for interesting things instead of just reasonable discussions, particularly if they are repetitive / predictable. Also it's not a ,,new'' way to discourage reasoned discussions, it was already like that when you decided to join HN in 2016.
    - victoryhb 5y ago
      So you have nothing "new" to say after all, but repeating what "everyone" should know already. HN should now censor your comment.
      - xiphias2 5y ago
        I didn't post this. Posts and comments have different criteria. But if I would be censored, that's OK, it happened multiple times before, but I still prefer it compared to other web forums, because I deserved it.
sph 5y ago
Discussion from yesterday on the same topic from the same author: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31191700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31191700 This is in response to that post from yesterday. It's worth flagging this one, or else it's going to be an infinite loop of knee jerk reactions. We can do without these.
fmakunbound 5y ago
dang 5y ago
It's normal for users to flag meta follow-ups to recent big threads, especially when they contain a lot of flamebait. If users didn't flag these, HN's front page would largely consist of meta flamebait follow-ups. Here's the principle: curiosity withers under repetition and fries under indignation; also, meta is the crack of internet forums. Repeat+indignant+meta is definitely worth flagging.
- benreesman 5y ago
  @dang you moderate this forum very well, arguably better than any forum out there. You and I know perfectly well that some kind of tribal loyalty around loyalty on a programming language (they all suck) is an IQ test. I’ll look the other way on Siebel committing outright fraud, and you let these idiots argue about go vs Rust without displaying any bias. Everyone knows that Thompson invented UTF-8. And I’m smarter than Pike, who was always a pity hire.
samhw 5y ago
> the Rust jihad As a Rust jihadist myself ... yeah I can't disagree with this description. Even I get sick of all the Rust chatter/evangelism on HN sometimes. I love it and it's my preferred tool, but I wouldn't mind hearing about some alternative topics at least some of the time. (As for the article: I wrote Go for several years professionally, and what he says, well - rem acu tetigit. I know a lot of people on that former team who were converted to Rust by the experience of writing Go. And then I know others, with a natural propensity to cultishness, who just responded the way so many people are responding in this thread.)
- cdelsolar 5y ago
  wtf is rem acu tetigit
  - samhw 5y ago
    Sorry - 'hit the nail on the head'. Literally: (you touched == tetigit (tangere)) ([the] point == rem (res)) (with [a] needle == acu (acus))'.[0] 'Point' (res) is already abstract - 'matter', 'thing' - not being used figuratively like the rest of the phrase. It's one of those phrasoids which is permanently stuck in my head from Latin classes when I was a teenager, but I might've been wrong in thinking it was one of the more widely-recognised ones. [0] 'You' is implied by the second-person verb ending on 'tetigit', 'with' is implied by the ablative case ending on 'acu' (the 'ablative of means'), while 'the' and 'a' are filled in altogether since Latin has no concept of definite/indefinite articles.

robonerd 5y ago

Flagging articles that criticize popular tools seems to be common. Particularly so with Go specifically.

jeroenhd 5y ago
Go and Rust seem to have some of the most rabid fan bases of all programming languages and this article mentions both. A perfect HN storm. I think all the arguments against Go in this article are fair and I think you can write articles just as long about any programming language of your choosing. It's very strange to see the level professional programmers will stoop to if their favourite tool gets criticised. The fanboys of programming languages are the worst part of a language community. The "why not rewrite it in Rust" and the "you're golanging it wrong" crowds only drive people away from their respective languages.

otterley 5y ago

Right now our only mechanism to indicate that we don't think a post is appropriate is to flag it. We don't have the ability to downvote posts that we don't feel meet the quality bar for being featured on HN.

sigzero 5y ago
Why is it flagged then? It is clearly an appropriate posting.
- otterley 5y ago

xiphias2 5y ago

I guess it's because it's not anything that hasn't been said before. Go is easy to start with and gets harder as you debug deep problems. Rust is very hard to start, then it gets easier over time. This has been said in many other threads, and we all know it's true.

victoryhb 5y ago
So the reason for the censorship is they read the entire article and saw nothing "new" about something you "all know is true"? That's indeed a "new" way to discourage reasoned discussions.
- xiphias2 5y ago
  Dang explained it many times, that HN is optimized for interesting things instead of just reasonable discussions, particularly if they are repetitive / predictable. Also it's not a ,,new'' way to discourage reasoned discussions, it was already like that when you decided to join HN in 2016.
  - victoryhb 5y ago
    So you have nothing "new" to say after all, but repeating what "everyone" should know already. HN should now censor your comment.
    - xiphias2 5y ago
      I didn't post this. Posts and comments have different criteria. But if I would be censored, that's OK, it happened multiple times before, but I still prefer it compared to other web forums, because I deserved it.

sph 5y ago

Discussion from yesterday on the same topic from the same author: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31191700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31191700 This is in response to that post from yesterday. It's worth flagging this one, or else it's going to be an infinite loop of knee jerk reactions. We can do without these.

fmakunbound 5y ago

dang 5y ago

It's normal for users to flag meta follow-ups to recent big threads, especially when they contain a lot of flamebait. If users didn't flag these, HN's front page would largely consist of meta flamebait follow-ups. Here's the principle: curiosity withers under repetition and fries under indignation; also, meta is the crack of internet forums. Repeat+indignant+meta is definitely worth flagging.

benreesman 5y ago
@dang you moderate this forum very well, arguably better than any forum out there. You and I know perfectly well that some kind of tribal loyalty around loyalty on a programming language (they all suck) is an IQ test. I’ll look the other way on Siebel committing outright fraud, and you let these idiots argue about go vs Rust without displaying any bias. Everyone knows that Thompson invented UTF-8. And I’m smarter than Pike, who was always a pity hire.

samhw 5y ago

> the Rust jihad As a Rust jihadist myself ... yeah I can't disagree with this description. Even I get sick of all the Rust chatter/evangelism on HN sometimes. I love it and it's my preferred tool, but I wouldn't mind hearing about some alternative topics at least some of the time. (As for the article: I wrote Go for several years professionally, and what he says, well - rem acu tetigit. I know a lot of people on that former team who were converted to Rust by the experience of writing Go. And then I know others, with a natural propensity to cultishness, who just responded the way so many people are responding in this thread.)

cdelsolar 5y ago
wtf is rem acu tetigit
- samhw 5y ago
  Sorry - 'hit the nail on the head'. Literally: (you touched == tetigit (tangere)) ([the] point == rem (res)) (with [a] needle == acu (acus))'.[0] 'Point' (res) is already abstract - 'matter', 'thing' - not being used figuratively like the rest of the phrase. It's one of those phrasoids which is permanently stuck in my head from Latin classes when I was a teenager, but I might've been wrong in thinking it was one of the more widely-recognised ones. [0] 'You' is implied by the second-person verb ending on 'tetigit', 'with' is implied by the ablative case ending on 'acu' (the 'ablative of means'), while 'the' and 'a' are filled in altogether since Latin has no concept of definite/indefinite articles.