4 ms·

Google cache is still live: http://74.125.155.132/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=cache:http://twitter.com/_why&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 http://74.125.155.132/search

by fizx 17y ago

Google cache is still live: http://74.125.155.132/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=cache:http://twitter.com/_why&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 http://74.125.155.132/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&#38... Edit: Also, twitter search results: http://search.twitter.com/search?q=%40_why http://search.twitter.com/search?q=%40_why Notably: racheltostring: RT: @_why: programming is rather thankless. u see your works become replaced by superior ones in a year. unable to run at all in a few more. about 21 hours ago from TwitterFox

tremendo 17y ago
programming is rather thankless... Maybe he read http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=771057 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=771057 in Re: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=771013 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=771013 ?
- pygy 17y ago
  He's got humor, you know. That pun chain doesn't seem offensive to me. Thanks for putting up the link.
basugasubaku 17y ago
He was (understandably) a bit sensitive about new works displacing his. He almost seemed to suspect some sort of conspiracy against Hpricot: "Clearly, the benchmarks you see on Ruby Inside are skewed to favor Nokogiri... Why not treat Hpricot fairly and use it properly in the benchmarks? It reeks of something." http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/181699 http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/181699
- petercooper 17y ago
  As the editor of Ruby Inside, I can confirm we (or me, as author of the piece) were not involved in any conspiracy or malicious intent against Hpricot. Heck, Why even wrote the foreword for my book :) Further, the benchmarks we republished were not by us, but just a screenshot of benchmarks shared by the creator of Nokogiri.
  - thismat 17y ago
    This bothers me honestly, why would you accept benchmark screenshots from someone that made claims against another persons code? Was this an interview or something? Was _why alerted to this as a chance to refute the claim by providing his own benchmarks? Could the data even be validated and not easily doctored?
    - petercooper 17y ago
      The benchmarks were from what was designed to be a fair test. It might not have worked out that way, but that was the intention of the creator nonetheless. I stuck a massive disclaimer on my link to those benchmarks and let people at it (since NO benchmarks are EVER undisputed - biggest lesson I've learned). The post is at http://www.rubyinside.com/ruby-xml-performance-benchmarks-1641.html http://www.rubyinside.com/ruby-xml-performance-benchmarks-16... if you want to see how it was portrayed. If everyone had to bother validating all the third party bits and pieces that get referenced on blogs, no-one would blog. Blogging is a "hey, check this out, I ain't saying it's true, but you might find it interesting" type of affair - it's not the New York Times (which is why regular journalism is foundering; it's expensive to fact check everything and, heck, it's a Ruby blog, not a trusted source of journalism).
      - thismat 17y ago
        I figured it had to be something of that nature, and indeed, the disclaimer is clear about the data presented. Upvoted for the explanation, thanks.
      - bunnny 17y ago
        Yeah, it sounds like you were really trying to be thoughtful, gracious, and evenhanded in your comparisons: Nokogiri: A Faster, Better HTML and XML Parser for Ruby (than Hpricot) http://www.rubyinside.com/nokogiri-ruby-html-parser-and-xml-parser-1288.html http://www.rubyinside.com/nokogiri-ruby-html-parser-and-xml-...
delackner 17y ago
This is exactly why such a complete self-deletion is worrying. I wasn't around in the neolithic days of the internet, but some people may remember that an early formative event in the WELL days was that a very well known and active contributor to the site deleted his entire posting history and then commited real life suicide. I dearly hope this has not happened and _why has simply moved on to other things...
- geira 17y ago
  I guess you're thinking of Tom Mandel. First, he deleted his posts after a tiff with his ex-fiance. Also, he died of lung cancer, not suicide. Full story here: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.05/ff_well_pr.html http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.05/ff_well_pr.html
  - delackner 17y ago
    I don't remember the fellow's name, but the anecdote was related in a book about online communities written by Clifford Stoll, and definitely involved suicide, not cancer. But the anecdote he related could have been incorrect...

by fizx 17y ago

tremendo 17y ago

programming is rather thankless... Maybe he read http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=771057 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=771057 in Re: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=771013 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=771013 ?

pygy 17y ago
He's got humor, you know. That pun chain doesn't seem offensive to me. Thanks for putting up the link.

basugasubaku 17y ago

He was (understandably) a bit sensitive about new works displacing his. He almost seemed to suspect some sort of conspiracy against Hpricot: "Clearly, the benchmarks you see on Ruby Inside are skewed to favor Nokogiri... Why not treat Hpricot fairly and use it properly in the benchmarks? It reeks of something." http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/181699 http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/181699

petercooper 17y ago
As the editor of Ruby Inside, I can confirm we (or me, as author of the piece) were not involved in any conspiracy or malicious intent against Hpricot. Heck, Why even wrote the foreword for my book :) Further, the benchmarks we republished were not by us, but just a screenshot of benchmarks shared by the creator of Nokogiri.
- thismat 17y ago
  This bothers me honestly, why would you accept benchmark screenshots from someone that made claims against another persons code? Was this an interview or something? Was _why alerted to this as a chance to refute the claim by providing his own benchmarks? Could the data even be validated and not easily doctored?
  - petercooper 17y ago
    The benchmarks were from what was designed to be a fair test. It might not have worked out that way, but that was the intention of the creator nonetheless. I stuck a massive disclaimer on my link to those benchmarks and let people at it (since NO benchmarks are EVER undisputed - biggest lesson I've learned). The post is at http://www.rubyinside.com/ruby-xml-performance-benchmarks-1641.html http://www.rubyinside.com/ruby-xml-performance-benchmarks-16... if you want to see how it was portrayed. If everyone had to bother validating all the third party bits and pieces that get referenced on blogs, no-one would blog. Blogging is a "hey, check this out, I ain't saying it's true, but you might find it interesting" type of affair - it's not the New York Times (which is why regular journalism is foundering; it's expensive to fact check everything and, heck, it's a Ruby blog, not a trusted source of journalism).
    - thismat 17y ago
      I figured it had to be something of that nature, and indeed, the disclaimer is clear about the data presented. Upvoted for the explanation, thanks.
    - bunnny 17y ago
      Yeah, it sounds like you were really trying to be thoughtful, gracious, and evenhanded in your comparisons: Nokogiri: A Faster, Better HTML and XML Parser for Ruby (than Hpricot) http://www.rubyinside.com/nokogiri-ruby-html-parser-and-xml-parser-1288.html http://www.rubyinside.com/nokogiri-ruby-html-parser-and-xml-...

delackner 17y ago

This is exactly why such a complete self-deletion is worrying. I wasn't around in the neolithic days of the internet, but some people may remember that an early formative event in the WELL days was that a very well known and active contributor to the site deleted his entire posting history and then commited real life suicide. I dearly hope this has not happened and _why has simply moved on to other things...

geira 17y ago
I guess you're thinking of Tom Mandel. First, he deleted his posts after a tiff with his ex-fiance. Also, he died of lung cancer, not suicide. Full story here: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.05/ff_well_pr.html http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.05/ff_well_pr.html
- delackner 17y ago
  I don't remember the fellow's name, but the anecdote was related in a book about online communities written by Clifford Stoll, and definitely involved suicide, not cancer. But the anecdote he related could have been incorrect...