Why is this flagged?
Because there is a coordinated effort on HN to suppress any dissent view on certain topics. Rust is one of these topics. If you want to be flagged and down voted, just write a critic about Rust. Even tell about this is a motive to be down voted.
Rust Isn't the Future of Systems Programming – It's Just the Hype Cycle
31–40 of 43 posts
Re: Rust Isn't the Future of Systems Programming – It's Just the Hype Cycle
#32Re: Rust Isn't the Future of Systems Programming – It's Just the Hype Cycle
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because there is a coordinated effort on HN to suppress any dissent view on certain topics. Rust is one of these topics. If you want to be flagged and down voted, just write a critic about Rust. Even tell about this is a motive to be down voted.
> If you want to be flagged and down voted, just write a critic about Rust. Nonsense. It's not all that hard to find well-received stuff on HN critical of Rust (e.g., from a quick search there's [0, 1, 2] and plenty more, especially around async and/or deps). The key is to write substantive/thoughtful/constructive criticism. In fact, that applies in general - substantive/thoughtful/constructive articles/comments are…
Re: Rust Isn't the Future of Systems Programming – It's Just the Hype Cycle
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you want to be flagged and down voted, just write a critic about Rust. Nonsense. It's not all that hard to find well-received stuff on HN critical of Rust (e.g., from a quick search there's [0, 1, 2] and plenty more, especially around async and/or deps). The key is to write substantive/thoughtful/constructive criticism. In fact, that applies in general - substantive/thoughtful/constructive articles/comments are…
Much more superficial stuff flies on this site and even gets hundreds of upvotes. You haven't explained why this is flagged.
Sure, but the fact that one thing gets one kind of reception but another thing gets another tells you little since HN is not a monolith. Different people read different things, have different thresholds for flagging stuff, so on and so forth.
> You haven't explained why this is flagged.
My comment was not an attempt to explain why the post was flagged in the first place?
It's not like I can give a definitive reason for its flagging either, since a) I don't know the precise manner in which HN's software determines whether something is flagged or not, b) I can't read the minds of everyone who flagged the article, let alone try to determine whether their reason for flagging was "valid" (assuming I'm even qualified to make that determination), and c) I have no idea if the moderators manually flagged this article. I can make guesses, sure, but it's not like my guesses would be worth any more than yours.
If you see something is flagged and think it should not be, the best way to try to resolve the issue is to either vouch for it, or if that doesn't work, email the moderators.
Re: Rust Isn't the Future of Systems Programming – It's Just the Hype Cycle
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Much more superficial stuff flies on this site and even gets hundreds of upvotes. You haven't explained why this is flagged.
> Much more superficial stuff flies on this site and even gets hundreds of upvotes. Sure, but the fact that one thing gets one kind of reception but another thing gets another tells you little since HN is not a monolith. Different people read different things, have different thresholds for flagging stuff, so on and so forth. > You haven't explained why this is flagged. My comment was not an attempt to explain why the…
If you're not trying to explain why this thing is flagged, or at least why it isn't flagged, idk why you are in this thread. But it's all good.
Re: Rust Isn't the Future of Systems Programming – It's Just the Hype Cycle
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Presumably because it's LLM-generated, as other comments here are pointing out.
How does anyone know that? Seems like an unfalsifiable accusation you can hurl at anything to dismiss it.
All of this points quite clearly to this being LLM-generated. But, as I pointed out in my other comment, as have others above, it's just not well argued. The points are shallow and don't adequately support the claims made. It looks to me very much like someone churning out posts on surface-level topics by prompting an LLM, either not having the expertise to tell the quality of the argument or just not bothering.
Re: Rust Isn't the Future of Systems Programming – It's Just the Hype Cycle
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Much more superficial stuff flies on this site and even gets hundreds of upvotes. Sure, but the fact that one thing gets one kind of reception but another thing gets another tells you little since HN is not a monolith. Different people read different things, have different thresholds for flagging stuff, so on and so forth. > You haven't explained why this is flagged. My comment was not an attempt to explain why the…
I don't think I have enough points to vouch for anything. The rules about how many points are required to do things seem to promote a hive mind phenomenon. If you're not trying to explain why this thing is flagged, or at least why it isn't flagged, idk why you are in this thread. But it's all good.
Based on this [0] (and a few other random comments search engines pulled up) the points threshold for vouching is supposedly 31. It does appear that I misunderstood the vouching functionality, though, since apparently it's supposed to counteract [dead] posts, not [flagged]. My mistake!
> The rules about how many points are required to do things seem to promote a hive mind phenomenon.
As with many things, it's a tradeoff. Having a points threshold also makes it harder to abuse new accounts to manipulate flags/votes/etc., so there's no free lunch here.
> If you're not trying to explain why this thing is flagged, or at least why it isn't flagged, idk why you are in this thread.
My intent was very specifically to push back against the claim that Rust criticism is a surefire way to get downvoted/flagged. The tl;dr is that good criticism of Rust is well-received, and this article is not a good critique and so it's not all that surprising that it was not well-received.
[0]: https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented/blob/m...
Re: Rust Isn't the Future of Systems Programming – It's Just the Hype Cycle
#38I find the comparison about being good for newcomers rather interesting. I would say none of them are easy for beginners. I don't see where C(++) can shine here. For a beginner into systems programming Go would be much easier as example. And if it's about programming in general then there are many, many more languages to choose from that are all easier to learn than C(++) and Rust.
> I don't see where C(++) can shine here [..] Go would be much easier There is a world of difference between the complexity of C and C++. C is in principle quite easy to understand (besides some syntactic quirks), similar to Turbo Pascal back in the day. Go, on the other hand, has various features that are not so easy for beginners to understand (e.g., interfaces with all their rules, or value vs. pointer receivers w…
You're probably right that for trivial examples C is, in principle, the simplest to learn and understand. But in reality, non-trivial C projects come with complex build systems, makefiles, macros, endless compiler flags... I've found it pretty hard to, for example, fork a moderately-sized C project and modify it. Hell sometimes even building it is a challenge when you don't understand make/build system errors and how to set up and configure C projects.
Go, however, i could just get up and running. Simple to use modules, simple to import dependencies, simple to build projects, great centralized documentation. Now granted do i fully understand all the nuances of things like pointer receivers and generics? No, but i don't really understand memory allocation in C either to be quite honest, and I've spent more time trying to understand C in my life than i have Go (please understand: extremely little in both cases)
Rust does seem similarly impenetrable honestly, except that it seems much easier to build and manage Rust projects. But I definitely can't even just read Rust code and get it the way i can Go (or even C)
Re: Rust Isn't the Future of Systems Programming – It's Just the Hype Cycle
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't see where C(++) can shine here [..] Go would be much easier There is a world of difference between the complexity of C and C++. C is in principle quite easy to understand (besides some syntactic quirks), similar to Turbo Pascal back in the day. Go, on the other hand, has various features that are not so easy for beginners to understand (e.g., interfaces with all their rules, or value vs. pointer receivers w…
Personally, coming from higher level languages (Python, TS, Java, C#) I've found Go by far the easiest to get productive in. You're probably right that for trivial examples C is, in principle, the simplest to learn and understand. But in reality, non-trivial C projects come with complex build systems, makefiles, macros, endless compiler flags... I've found it pretty hard to, for example, fork a moderately-sized C pro…
Programming beginners (to whom my statement applied) lack preconceived notions about what programming "should" be like. They build their mental models around C's paradigms from the start, avoiding the cognitive dissonance experienced by those expecting automatic memory management or rich standard libraries and integrated build systems.
Re: Rust Isn't the Future of Systems Programming – It's Just the Hype Cycle
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think I have enough points to vouch for anything. The rules about how many points are required to do things seem to promote a hive mind phenomenon. If you're not trying to explain why this thing is flagged, or at least why it isn't flagged, idk why you are in this thread. But it's all good.
> I don't think I have enough points to vouch for anything. Based on this [0] (and a few other random comments search engines pulled up) the points threshold for vouching is supposedly 31. It does appear that I misunderstood the vouching functionality, though, since apparently it's supposed to counteract [dead] posts, not [flagged]. My mistake! > The rules about how many points are required to do things seem to promo…