4 ms·
HN is mostly US audience. EU = bad US = good
by openplatypus 1y ago
HN is mostly US audience.
EU = bad
US = good
- CalRobert 1y agoSeems to depend on time of day
- voidUpdate 1y agotimezones probably, EU is more likely to be on HN at different times to US
- microtonal 1y agoThis is certainly the case. I have noticed this in voting patterns as well. I often comment strongly in favor of EU regulations (I believe capitalism is fairer and benefits consumers more with stronger regulations). During times the US is asleep such comments often get a lot of upvotes. During times where EU and the US are up, there seems to be much more contention in the voting, with votes swinging up and down a lot. By the way, I don't think this is a good way of voting. IMO comments should be upvoted if they provide good insights (even if you disagree with them) and downvoted when they are low-content/trolling/full of fallacies.
- johnisgood 1y agoI have noticed this trend, too.
- kergonath 1y agoI regularly have posts that go from say +10 in the evening to -5 in the morning (I post from the EU). I mostly agree with your observations. That said, > IMO comments should be upvoted if they provide good insights (even if you disagree with them) and downvoted when they are low-content/trolling/full of fallacies. Votes are not a popularity contest. Only you see your score, and it does not matter one bit whether you have 2 or 20 upvotes on a post. Even moderate negative scores don’t matter. The grey threshold is more important, and you have to post something quite bad to end up there. I think I read a good post that was dead once. The system is working and the end result is what you want. Sure, it could be better, but we are never going to get a perfect implementation because humans are social animals, and not always very rational.
- kubb 1y agoBut weren't people here supposed to be intellectually curious, and have the cognitive tools to overcome things like instinctive tribalism?
- PaulRobinson 1y agoI think you'll find at least 1/4 of HN comments are indicative of stating things from a place of strong instinctive tribalism, but this crowd are just very slightly better at using words to defend our position in a more noble way. That's OK, it shows we're human, it's not all AI slop here (yet?).
- kubb 1y agoI guess being smart sometimes doesn’t lead you to have a more accurate opinion, but to develop more sophisticated rhetorical devices to defend your inaccurate opinion?
- lazide 1y agoOh man, just wait until you see the research on fMRI timing on when decision making vs rationalization parts of the brain engage. Hint: rationalization tends to be after. Not to say that it can’t be overridden with training and/or self-reflection/self-skepticism, but first reactions tend to allows follow this pattern.
- kubb 1y agoI'm aware of that, but opinions aren't quick decisions, they form over time, so that might be a different mechanism at work. Edit: hmm, I suppose voicing your hot take about a news piece is a quick decision though.
- lazide 1y agoYeah. I’ve been steadily figuring out why the ‘strong, silent type’ used to be 1) so much more common, and 2) hated by a certain type of personality, and 3) might be a better approach than anyone wants to think about.