3 ms·
> On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer m
by SteveNuts 2y ago
> On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
I think this would fall under "anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity", even though most of us think it's bunk.
- beardyw 2y agoThanks for that. I will suggest that we modify it to: "anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity even though most of us think it's bunk." That will avoid a lot of problems!
- SteveNuts 2y agoThat seems like an ironically anti-scientific stance to take, not to mention a slippery slope to start moderating what people find interesting would introduce some serious bias.
- _heimdall 2y agoModerators would gave an extremely difficult task trying to sift through (a) what most of think is hunk and (b) the cases where most of us are actually wrong.
- dredmorbius 2y agoI'd make a distinction. The concept being studied is bunk. The methodology to show it's bunk is ... intellectually gratifying, IMO. Specifically, how does one "prove a negative", at least to the sense of prediction no better than random?