Live data from Hacker News

Slashdot effect

en.wikipedia.org

31–40 of 74 posts

Re: Slashdot effect

#31
No one in 2025 should be allowed to criticize early 2000s web practices as we have come full circle in many ways.

They were limited by tools and resources. Now you'll just see some async "API endpoint error -32768 timeout" and 8,000 spinning pinwheels on the page instead of it simply hanging. Because now you need to allocate 650MB RAM so you can output Hello World in some buggy "stack" with "memory safety".

The smart ones were using Java 25 years ago and what needed some 80lb Solaris box could run off a mobile phone now.

Re: Slashdot effect

#32
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah, it's around, but a ghost of its former glory.

I still check t regularly alongside HN. Need a counterpoint to HN submission coverage and crowd-editorial zeitgeist.

Same.. however I've been using Alterslash as a story summary for years.

https://alterslash.org/

Re: Slashdot effect

#33
post #2

Can someone with some more experience explain why this happens? The most basic webserver, like a TCP socket served from a C program, serving some files etc. can take tens of thousands of requests per second, per core, on reasonably recent hardware. What's going on that's taking down these sites, really, when its not a quota limit?

- slower, often bare metal hardware

- lack of scalability (you can’t dynamically spin up a bare metal server if you don’t already have one in your rack)

- slower memory models (CGI, and forking meant it took longer for the OS kernel to allocate system resources)

- improvements to TCP and fork performances in the Linux kernel over the years. Such as changes to how TCP negotiation happens

- improvements to HTTP transit such as improved compression performance, HTTP/3, etc.

- CDNs weren’t common place, and were super expensive.

- caching was in its infancy. Tools like varnish (I think it was called) were complicated and setting up memcached, varnish, etc all required additional hardware, that added to hosting costs.

- HTTP servers weren’t as mature. Plus weren’t included in the language runtime (eg you’d run httpd that would fork an instance of PHP rather than run the HTTP server as part of the Python, et al)

- serving static content of NFSs mounted SAN was slow (the POSIX overhead, plus NFS protocol, plus network roundtrip, plus disk access times)

- mechanical drives were slow

And so on and so forth.

The biggest difference I think was a combination of affordable or free CDNs, reducing pressure on the backend, and the easy of scaling (VM, Docker, etc) meaning you don’t need to find a happy middle ground between costs and high availability.

Re: Slashdot effect

#34
post #2

Can someone with some more experience explain why this happens? The most basic webserver, like a TCP socket served from a C program, serving some files etc. can take tens of thousands of requests per second, per core, on reasonably recent hardware. What's going on that's taking down these sites, really, when its not a quota limit?

there used to be a lot more shared hosting in the world when Slashdot ruled the geek news roost

it'd be fine if it's one site on a dedicated machine, but these shared webhosts would routinely cram 500-1000 hosting accounts onto something like a single-core, HT-less 2.4GHz Pentium 4 with two gigs of RAM, running mpm_prefork on Apache 2.0, with single-node MySQL 5.x (maybe even 4.x!) on the same box... which was not terribly efficient as others observed

you carry about 20x the compute power of that machine in your pocket, even a Raspberry Pi 4 could triple the workload

Re: Slashdot effect

#35

Kind of funny to find this on the front page of HN. Makes me wonder what percentage of today's HN readers didn't live through the Slashdot era. (I'm aware it's still around.)

> Makes me wonder what percentage of today's HN readers didn't live through the Slashdot era. I definitely missed out :( What was it like?

It was a lot like HN, but more curated and with a more complex (and arguably better) moderation system. More focused on Linux and open source than HN, but still a technology news site with comments.

Re: Slashdot effect

#36

Kind of funny to find this on the front page of HN. Makes me wonder what percentage of today's HN readers didn't live through the Slashdot era. (I'm aware it's still around.)

>Makes me wonder what percentage of today's HN readers didn't live through the Slashdot era.

Please don't out me as a ghost parent

Re: Slashdot effect

#37
post #2

Can someone with some more experience explain why this happens? The most basic webserver, like a TCP socket served from a C program, serving some files etc. can take tens of thousands of requests per second, per core, on reasonably recent hardware. What's going on that's taking down these sites, really, when its not a quota limit?

/. effect is basically a ddos, same principles apply. basically sockets need to be created and torn down faster than incoming requests and they just aren't; they get queued up for a while and/or kill the host if it isn't configured correctly and keeps trying serving traffic which it can't due to resource exhaustion. whether it's a 'modern stack' requiring hundreds of MB of ram per request or a C CGI program matters only quantitatively.

Re: Slashdot effect

#38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The name changed when Slashdot lost significant mindshare among tech nerds.

Why did it lose this mindshare?

Because all social platforms and message boards are like living entities:

They have their infancy and grow into something popular (relatively speaking) then your older members either get bored or jaded, often both. The culture of the platform starts to change while more people leave disliking the change than new people discover the platform. Resulting in the platform steadily shrinking in popularity.

Every social network and forum has experienced the same phenomenon.

Re: Slashdot effect

#39

No one in 2025 should be allowed to criticize early 2000s web practices as we have come full circle in many ways. They were limited by tools and resources. Now you'll just see some async "API endpoint error -32768 timeout" and 8,000 spinning pinwheels on the page instead of it simply hanging. Because now you need to allocate 650MB RAM so you can output Hello World in some buggy "stack" with "memory safety". The smart…

One of the most popular API frameworks is called “FastAPI” but in any meaningful benchmark it’s one of the slowest commercially used pieces of web software the industry has adopted.

There is no hope for large segments of the industry. We actively choose to make bad decisions all the time, and then people rationalize them.

Re: Slashdot effect

#40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Makes me wonder what percentage of today's HN readers didn't live through the Slashdot era. I definitely missed out :( What was it like?

It was a lot like HN, but more curated and with a more complex (and arguably better) moderation system. More focused on Linux and open source than HN, but still a technology news site with comments.

To be honest I never liked the community much. But back then I still stubbornly clinging to smaller, more specialised communities (plus OSNews.com haha)
Post reply on HN