Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

1% rule

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–158 of 158 posts

Re: 1% rule

#151

Post by JeanMarcS »

dang wrote: post #145
Fnoord wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, I'm not logged in on every device. For example generally I'm not logged in on my mobile because I don't like typing on it. On a work computer I'm not logged in either. Though I don't know how widespread such usage is.

Very. In the numbers above, 76% of page views are from users not logged in. I was surprised it wasn't even higher, since I remember it as having been 95% in some past analysis. This is more likely because I measured it differently than because something massively changed.

To be honest I’m surprised it’s not less, but that might be because I assumed everyone is doing like me.

Most of the time when I submit something, I’m on my phone, so I’m always logged, because session never ends.

If I had to log in every time, for sure I will browse « anonymously ». But once your logged in, why bother log out ?

Re: 1% rule

#152

Post by dwd »

Zanni wrote: post #101
c3534l wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure that's a good assumption. Introverted users may be more likely to participate in online discussions since they prefer it over in-person conversations.

Hmm. I'm an introvert, and I find I'm less likely to participate in online discussions, mostly for the reason cycloptic mentioned above: online discussions will be read by more people and require extra care (which can be emotionally exhausting, especially on a contentious topic). I generally prefer to interact with fewer people, so one-on-one communication or small groups are ideal. You may be conflating introversion…

I tend to mix introversion with having an overly active internal thinking process.

I'm one of those people who pause before responding, because I'm thinking through my response before speaking, rather than blurting out the first thing that comes to mind.

I find overthinking a response can also be inhibiting as I can fall into the "do I really need to say that...and now", so I don't.

Re: 1% rule

#153

Post by dwd »

dang wrote: post #92
giancarlostoro wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would make a basic assumption that most users have either at minimum two IP addresses or three they use for HN. One would be work, another home and at the minimum one would be mobile although I think mobile IP changes as you travel if I am not mistaken and not guaranteed to be static. So potentially more than three but these could be shared among HN users so maybe 2 at a minimum at the very least.

They do change, and quite a lot, which means users often have many mobile IP addresses. However, those same IP addresses often show up for many users, so it's hard to know how the counts shake out.

That'll be me... Daily one hour train commute, and my IP often changes a number of times as I switch from tower to tower, as well as drop out due to no signal in places.

I also switch between networks as my mobile GSM and portable wifi are different providers.

Re: 1% rule

#154

Post by kthejoker2 »

EGreg wrote: post #74
rzzzt wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does the novelty element start, though? Someone could come and argue that your comment is also predictable, as is my reply below it.

Let me share an original thought I just came up with. As Paul Graham recently wrote, you can be an accidental moderate because you disagree with people out of intellectual honesty and critically analyzing the positions in an effort to learn something. So people like that contribute to steering conversations towards the truth. (PS: Yes, what I wrote above was ironic on purpose.)

> The general or prevailing opinion on any object is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied.

JS Mill, On Liberty

Re: 1% rule

#155

Post by kthejoker2 »

dredmorbius wrote: post #94
nyfresh wrote: post #62

Long time lurker here.I often feel I have nothing useful to contribute.So I don't. You're welcome.

What I discovered, decades ago, was that posting questions, or even better, answers, even wrong ones (unintentionally) is a phenomenal way to learn things. That still holds true. Though it helps profoundly to not insist on being wrong. Which I try to do. Not always successfully.

> the best way to get the right answer on the internet is not to ask a question; it's to post the wrong answer

https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law

Re: 1% rule

#156

Post by sixothree »

dang wrote: post #142
sixothree wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have posted three Healthcare IT related posts, none of which received more than 2 points. So yeah. I'm done.

I took a look and saw two: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20422094 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18363410 Those are both a bit too bureaucratic to be what the HN community finds intellectually interesting. There are a lot of submissions like this, often from trade journals, and they rarely do well because they lack motivation for a non-specialist audience to find them interesting. Usually there needs to…

I appreciate the feedback. I feel like there is a healthcare revolution taking place that most people have no clue about, especially in terms of interoperability. I am constantly amazed at how few tech workers have any knowledge of FHIR and related technologies, especially considering the opportunities they provide to startups.

Also another one of my links includes Direct which is a healthcare technology that provides secure communication for clinicians that uses identity vetting to ensure the recipient is who they say they are. I wish it had wider adoption.

Re: 1% rule

#157

Post by dang »

sixothree wrote: post #156
dang wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took a look and saw two: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20422094 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18363410 Those are both a bit too bureaucratic to be what the HN community finds intellectually interesting. There are a lot of submissions like this, often from trade journals, and they rarely do well because they lack motivation for a non-specialist audience to find them interesting. Usually there needs to…

I appreciate the feedback. I feel like there is a healthcare revolution taking place that most people have no clue about, especially in terms of interoperability. I am constantly amazed at how few tech workers have any knowledge of FHIR and related technologies, especially considering the opportunities they provide to startups. Also another one of my links includes Direct which is a healthcare technology that provide…

It's a communication problem. The way those articles are written simply doesn't communicate what's new or of interest there—at least not in a style that HN readers are likely to be open to.

What might work better is writing a blog-style article about each of these: what's new, what's different, why it matters—and then linking to some of these other more enterprisey or bureaucratic sources. If you decide to work on that, or know someone who is, feel free to contact hn@ycombinator.com because we might be able to give some tips about how to structure it for HN appeal. "New opportunities for startups in healthcare" is definitely a theme with a lot of HN juice, if presented the right way. "A healthcare revolution is taking place" is another.

One thing that would help is if the voice presenting this material comes from someone the community perceives as a peer—not necessarily an HN member but someone who could be. When first impressions suggest something dry and managerial, it gets pattern-matched into the same category as rote bureaucratic or industry sources, and people quickly close the tab.

Re: 1% rule

#158

Post by jazzdev »

rapnie wrote: post #93
yingw787 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why I left Quora. I'm a really gullible person, and I was going to respond to somebody who posted something inflammatory, then I realized I had the option to just walk away. So I did. I remember something similar about companies too. When you have product market fit, customers will sear you when your product doesn't work. If you don't, you'll never hear from them again.

Good guide to avoiding trolls. Golden rule: "A conversation is not a contest" https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/master/Avoiding_Tr...

Some very insightful thoughts in that link. I especially liked these two:

"People who provide challenging opinions are not trolling so long as they are not deviating from the conversation at hand. There are some people whose only goal is to attain emotional harmony. When a challenging opinion is encountered it is easy for some people to view this disruption to the social norm as trolling, when it likely isn't."

"Some people are easily offended. When a person engages in a conversation directly without distraction they aren't trolling simply because you became emotional."

Post reply on HN