4 ms·

People don't get downvoted. Posts get downvoted, sometimes for inaccuracy. Tough break.

• jchw 3y ago
  Yeah, nobody really cares about the dumb number next to the posts anyway. What's actually annoying is being misunderstood, because the article seems to have produced mainly two comments: 1. "That's a pretty bad default." (it would be, after all.) 2. "That scenario is quite contrived." The former is just a misunderstanding, but I think the reason why it happened is simple: the article is written in a way that doesn't really make it clear whether it is a condition they added or a condition they observed. On the other hand, giving someone the benefit of the doubt, I personally assumed that it was unlikely someone would intentionally add this, since it's, well, you know... Quite contrived. I think I understand the purpose now (it's intentionally contrived, merely for practice with probably a less contrived setup in the future) and I hate to be overly harsh on the article, since it's perfectly fine for someone's personal blog, but when I see something on HN's frontpage, I generally have some expectation for how interesting it is. After all, plenty of genuinely very interesting things die in new, why would this make it out? Alas, sometimes it just happens.
  • TrickardRixx 3y ago
    My takeaway from reading all this is that there is no reason this article should have made it to the front page of HN, as all it did was create confusion and burn 10 minutes of my time trying to clarify what was happening. Nothing about this article or the discussion it has created is interesting, just frustrating.