2 ms·
I think its not so much what you said, but how you said it. The way I read it, is that by saying that you found it odd that people were impressed by this, it c
by alan_cx 14y ago
I think its not so much what you said, but how you said it.
The way I read it, is that by saying that you found it odd that people were impressed by this, it can be felt that you were implying that people impressed by this demo and code are some how backward in their knowledge or thinking. And by pointing that out, you must there for be implying your own superiority. So, bolstering self image and suggesting its ego driven fits with that.
Do you see what I mean?
You could have just said, "yeah very cool, and here is some additional info for those who are interested." But instead, you implied a negative value judgement on people who liked the demo and code. People don't like that much.
- MrScruff 14y agoI don't think there's anything particularly clever about knowing about this algorithm or not. I find it odd when people are impressed by things implemented in one language/runtime when they wouldn't be impressed by it being implemented in another language/runtime. I find the excitement reserved for 'here's X implemented in JS' stories strange. To me it's basically the same story every time. I realise that the HN readership includes a fair fraction of web developers in it's readership, so perhaps my view is in a minority. As others have said, if the link was to a technical discussion of the algorithm presented alongside a JS example implementation, it would have made more sense to me. I do apologise if some took this as a personal slight.