3 ms·

I've found 8 so far [1][2][3]. Some are exact duplicates, some point to / while others to /index.html, /about.html, etc. Note: most submissions were done by re

I've found 8 so far [1][2][3]. Some are exact duplicates, some point to / while others to /index.html, /about.html, etc. Note: most submissions were done by real and reputable users, so I'm not implying any foul play here. Quite the opposite; I backed the original project on Indie Gogo, and am pleased with the progress so far. Would strongly recommend anyone interested in the topic to donate to Michael (BTC address below). My gripe is with HN duplicity detector, that let people submit equal or very similar links, over and over again. [1] Book: (some are exact duplicates) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7920183 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7920183 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6796703 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6796703 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7555191 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7555191 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7143192 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7143192 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6801036 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6801036 [2] Indie Gogo: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6795285 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6795285 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6794584 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6794584 [3] Original Blog post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6796917 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6796917

resu_nimda 12y ago
I believe the dupe detector is left purposely "leaky." I don't understand what's so wrong with dupes, especially the amount of effort you've put into this one. I don't see every headline on HN, neither do you, nor does anyone (I hope). What is your methodology for trawling through the archives to find interesting things you might have missed? Some people like having a chance for them to pop up again, which usually indicates that they're high quality. And inevitably someone will show up in the comments and link all the old discussions and then people can review those and also start a new discussion! And if you've already seen it, you can skip it! What's the issue? Obviously, a massive flood of dupes is not desirable, so there is balance to be found, but I think they hit it pretty well. They also have to factor in the wide range of reading habits.
- dang 12y ago
  The policy, which has been stable for a long time and which we intend to put in the FAQ, is that reposts are ok if an item hasn't had significant attention in the last year. In this case, both available chapters of the book have had significant attention [1,2], so I think a post of its home page has to count as a dupe. If and when Chapter 3 appears, however, that will make a nice non-dupey post. (Good luck with the book, Michael!) 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6794308 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6794308 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7588158 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7588158
  - michael_nielsen 12y ago
    Thanks for the clarification. Yes, it would be great to have that policy in the FAQ.

resu_nimda 12y ago

I believe the dupe detector is left purposely "leaky." I don't understand what's so wrong with dupes, especially the amount of effort you've put into this one. I don't see every headline on HN, neither do you, nor does anyone (I hope). What is your methodology for trawling through the archives to find interesting things you might have missed? Some people like having a chance for them to pop up again, which usually indicates that they're high quality. And inevitably someone will show up in the comments and link all the old discussions and then people can review those and also start a new discussion! And if you've already seen it, you can skip it! What's the issue? Obviously, a massive flood of dupes is not desirable, so there is balance to be found, but I think they hit it pretty well. They also have to factor in the wide range of reading habits.

dang 12y ago
The policy, which has been stable for a long time and which we intend to put in the FAQ, is that reposts are ok if an item hasn't had significant attention in the last year. In this case, both available chapters of the book have had significant attention [1,2], so I think a post of its home page has to count as a dupe. If and when Chapter 3 appears, however, that will make a nice non-dupey post. (Good luck with the book, Michael!) 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6794308 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6794308 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7588158 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7588158
- michael_nielsen 12y ago
  Thanks for the clarification. Yes, it would be great to have that policy in the FAQ.