I usually wake up every morning and read the guardian, specifically its comments section which is a particular interesting section (most days)
Thinking about it though, I realise that most of the things I read on it are not relevant to myself. They speak of wars, problems society in general is facing, there are calls for mobilisation in regards to recycling, civil rights or some new found scandal.
These things are important to know of course and certainly interesting. Nonetheless I am reading the opinion of someone else. Someone who I have no reason to believe has a better or more righteous opinion than myself. I can not help it sometimes but think, in reflection, that they are maybe even influencing my own opinion, whether for good or bad.
I do not like my opinion to be influenced not based on facts, but words someone wrote without giving it too much thought. If their opinions are not based on facts or superior knowledge why should I give them the opportunity to influence myself, especially when bearing in mind that most of them have an agenda.
The guardian newspaper is of course very different from hacker news. Hacker News is a community which besides trying to take advantage of the fact that there is strength in numbers, i.e someone likes a story, others decide whether they like it or not, if many like a story, then there is a good chance that it is a good story, it also has a certain "code of conduct". Going further, as far as the website itself is concerned, the signal to noise ratio is high. There is a lot of good and interesting content.
The question though is whether interesting is good enough.
This particular website seems to appeal to the above average intellect crowd who require intellectual stimulation, but is it a waste of time?
I have mentioned the guardian, one of UK's leading newspapers, and compared it somewhat on this particular point to hacker news. Therefore I do not mean whether hacker news per se is a waste of time, I am speaking of the activity itself.
The activity can be defined as spending time reading fragmented material which is interesting to know, but not necessarily relevant to yourself. Material which is not relevant to yourself might not mean practically useless or that it does not indirectly effect your thinking and ability to perform. Nonetheless it does seem to mean in the context of this particular activity that it is knowledge somewhat remote with no use besides some mental ejaculation.
I do not wish to come accross as someone who would rather be isolated to his own enclave without wishing to know what goes on in the world, or find out interesting things such as the finding of a study about psychopathy. I am naturaly interested on many things and believe they have contributed to some extend towards my perception of the world.
The question is whether those 4 hour or so in the morning reading the guardian newspaper and then the articles on hackers news are worth it.
What do you think?