Live data from Hacker News

Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News

kevq.uk

51–60 of 179 posts

Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News

#51
post #12
post #5

Ah, the what.cd strategy. Minus the exclusive content.

Man, I miss what.cd, not just for the content but for the obsessive users they had and the collections they made. Want all albums with a shoe as the cover? They have a collection for that. Want good music to start a journey into classical music in the 1800s? They have a collection for that. I mostly used it to discover great music, and the void that what.cd left has yet to be filled for me.

There's a site that is basically oink 3. Don't forget that what itself was a successor of oink. Not sure if it's against the rules to name it. It seems much harder to get an invite to it than it was for the previous 2 though.

Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News

#52
post #23

The down-vote feature (for those who didn't read the article: you have to provide feedback to down-vote) is something I've spent years saying HN badly needs. These days I just don't bother posting most of the time because while I shouldn't be bothered by abuse of negative rep; you can't help be pissed off when you've spent a short while including detail only for someone who doesn't understand the subject or has a per…

I really liked this idea too until I realized that it's really easy to come up with an excuse like "this doesn't make any sense". Which often times, is the real reason. I don't think mods have time to investigate each little spat and confrontation if someone chooses to "abuse" the system.

I think HN's current system of keeping a limited window open so that comments that in general are disagreed with will be downvoted makes sense. Honestly, I think it's even kind of brilliant, and I am not sure what system would be better.

Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News

#53
Invite only? Google in beginning was the same, hence why I never made a gmail account and stayed on yahoo, which allowed me to easy move from it to protonmail 15 years later. Also Facebook was the same, only students were allowed in beginning, which meant I never made a Facebook account either.

Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News

#54
post #14

And HN is arguably better for not being invite-only. There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment, but would never have become a formal blog post. Invite-only communities intentionally give up on that kind of discourse for... what? Easier moderation?

I think that when our reputations are on the line, that we act much better but also discard the grit and sharp edges that are the catalyst for interest and growth. I believe that we begin to converge on a single, aggregate pseudo-personality that is the most accepted register for communicating within.

Karma points enable this convergence because they are the only metric that we can do data analysis on comment quality, and so build into the various user interfaces.

So we can all think of many combinations of karma and account - 4chan, reddit, hackernews, youtube (which was trying to require given names); The concept of a website displaying account progeny is both an affront to privacy (in both directions) and a remarkable way to improve comment quality, which I make no effort to define.

The invitation only model seems to scale only so far, as all "cool parties" start off cool because only the cool people are invited (cool in this sense means compatible: consider both artificial and natural boundaries such as a physical party of people congregating for social purposes, a private web forum, or even the internet itself, which was initially available to only those that could enter and navigate it). We have euphemisms such as "Eternal September" to connote the perpetual ruining by outsiders infiltrating what was previously more private.

I vastly prefer to allow the unsanitized comments to enter a feed, and root through them so that people are not behaving as though being watched. It's exhausting but because both extremes are allowed to exist, the comments with the highest signal to noise ratio are often the most honest. Anecdotally I have found (exceedingly rarely) the most honest, insightful, or inclusive comments are on a site like 4chan, with the least restrictions and the least incentive to build a reputation (it's impossible). On hackernews, and I know I am projecting, I believe that we artificially act better than we are, on average, because we have something here to lose. A clever post turns into a job reference, or a reference to work becomes discovered by a future boss, etc.

Ultimately I am glad that all of these combinations exist. Losing a cultivated registry of who's who would have an immediate loss of largely high quality comments, but losing the wild west of anonymous bilge leaves us with no place to be our most honest, regardless of how much or how little it contributes.

Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News

#55
post #14

And HN is arguably better for not being invite-only. There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment, but would never have become a formal blog post. Invite-only communities intentionally give up on that kind of discourse for... what? Easier moderation?

> There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment This is now a myth. HN used to be like this but look for yourself, it's no longer like this. It's no longer worth my time to dig for worthwhile nuggets in the HN comments nor is it worth my time to post a high q…

I disagree. An example that immediately comes to mind is the 737 MAX grounding. People very experienced in flight systems and the way the Boeing software is designed appeared (from where!) with some absolutely fascinating insight that I haven’t read elsewhere.

It doesn’t happen often, but HN doesn’t often discuss things outside of its wheelhouse either. Usually we’re litigating matters of opinion, usually about whether JavaScript is bad or not.

Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News

#56
Firstly, I like HN. I've been regularly visiting this site for over a year, and I like the content and commentary.

And while I like the idea that anyone can join, it would be really nice to limit the down vote for the same reasons outlined in other comments here.

Someone I work with put it bluntly when they said "Just post a polite but witty reply to something on Hacker News and watch your points tumble like corporate stock after a security breach."

Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News

#57
post #23

The down-vote feature (for those who didn't read the article: you have to provide feedback to down-vote) is something I've spent years saying HN badly needs. These days I just don't bother posting most of the time because while I shouldn't be bothered by abuse of negative rep; you can't help be pissed off when you've spent a short while including detail only for someone who doesn't understand the subject or has a per…

Another reason for requiring feedback for downvoting is so others know why it was downvoted. There have been many times where I’ve seen a dead comment on a topic I’m not familiar. I know the general user disagrees with that statement but I have no idea what’s “wrong” with it. Conceivably it’s because it’s obviously wrong to anyone in that domain so nobody bothers commenting or it’s a contentious issue in that domain and people who agree or could provide further insight don’t think it’s worth the negativity to bother commenting.

Either way I have no clue. I read a comment recently about setting up a graphics pipeline that seemed reasonable enough but was downvoted to hell. I would have liked to know why.

Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point here is that if someone starts spouting rubbish, the person who invited them loses "face" - it reflects badly on them. So invitations aren't hard to come by, provided you have a reasonable reputation for saying things that are sensible. This is a throwback to an early age when you would never talk to someone in social circles without first being introduced. If someone turned out to be a "bad sort" t…

Doesn't that just cause a massive filter bubble effect?

That's the flip side, and part of the reason research on the question is active, ongoing, and occasionally contentious. It's a choice to make, and a mechanism to employ. One alternative is the HN model wherein everyone can contribute and you have no idea of their experience, expertise, or trustworthiness.

It's a choice, and it has consequences.

One thing I'd like to see added to HN is the ability for me to assign trustworthiness scores to other users, and then filter based on that. There are people here who I've come to know will provide value, even if their views are unpalatable, and their karma is low. There are others who have reasonably high karma, and yet who I know add little of value (for me!) to conversations.

Again, that would risk a filter-bubble, but it would reduce the number of comments I need to wade through before getting to those of value -- all from my personal view, of course, and your judgements would be different.

Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News

#59
post #14

And HN is arguably better for not being invite-only. There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment, but would never have become a formal blog post. Invite-only communities intentionally give up on that kind of discourse for... what? Easier moderation?

> There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment This is now a myth. HN used to be like this but look for yourself, it's no longer like this. It's no longer worth my time to dig for worthwhile nuggets in the HN comments nor is it worth my time to post a high q…

I come across one of these kind of comments every other day. Some of my favourites are from green accounts that registered just to share their knowledge. So many of HN viewers aren't even registered, but when the urge arrives to share, the low barrier for entry means they can. We all get something from it.

Re: Why Lobste.rs Is Better Than Hacker News

#60
post #14

And HN is arguably better for not being invite-only. There are so many articles on HN where the top comment is by somebody with deep domain knowledge who provides some kind of original insight that fits into the low length and polish expectations of a comment, but would never have become a formal blog post. Invite-only communities intentionally give up on that kind of discourse for... what? Easier moderation?

I agree...

I've had my projects (see my hn profile) or my blog posts hit lobsters a bunch of times and finding myself unable to respond to the comments as I don't have an account there.

Post reply on HN