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

Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

katamari64.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 441 posts

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#111

Post by jibal »

andai wrote: post #65
jibal wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author knows the orientation of his language better than anyone else. > Odin was a major influence on Jai. This is a popular joke because of the release timeline. The reality is the inverse, and Ginger Bill has acknowledged the influence of Jai.

I clearly remember Jonathan Blow talking about how Jai's syntax was influenced by his conversations with Bill. But it was 10+ years ago, so I might have gotten it mixed up. I think the influence ended up going both ways eventually though.

Yes, you have it mixed up ... Jai development started 2 years before Odin. And the claim was

> Odin was a major influence on Jai

which simply isn't true. Just google it, e.g.,

https://handmade.network/forums/t/1338-the_odin_programming_...

https://www.reddit.com/r/Jai/comments/1j2idvz/is_odin_kind_o...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46317815

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#112

Post by Alpha3031 »

econ wrote: post #91
andrybak wrote: post #10

> Articles for Deletion votes -- original with comments > > Summarizing it, 5/7 for delete have accounts, and 1/4 for keep have accounts. Not along after the final vote, a Wikipedia admin deleted the article. Being a little bit lax with my language, the majority's consensus agreed that Odin isn't notable, and the article had no reliable sources. important clarification about a popular misconception: "Articles for del…

[flagged]

> I use to play this game where I gently rub as many established users as possible the wrong way.

> I do this as an IP editor as I've seen them fabricate excuses to ban users often enough.

You know there's no need to fabricate an excuse to indefinitely block someone for trolling right?

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#113

Post by zerobees »

Morromist wrote: post #103
mindcrime wrote: post #86

Wikipedia seems stuck in an antiquated worldview where things like traditionally-published books with second- or third-hand reports of what happened, and which are frequently incomplete or wholly inaccurate, are nonetheless considered more authoritative than primary sources you can find with a ten-second Google search. So much this. Wikipedia's processes and policies are - in ways - an outdated and archaic relic of a…

"It's amazing that anybody creates Wikpedia articles at all" Yeh. This is why I stopped editing wikipedia very often. They are maniacal about deleting things that I consider noteworthy but others don't. I still love wikipedia and think its the best website on the internet, but this is probably its biggest flaw.

> "It's amazing that anybody creates Wikpedia articles at all"

Very few people do, which actually makes it worse: of course the spammers and the hustlers are still motivated, so the needle moves more firmly into the territory of "most newcomer contributions are made in bad faith". Editors and admins feel increasingly under siege, so they respond more aggressively to everything.

It's basically the same problem as with real-world policing: because the cops overwhelmingly have deal with "problem" cases (you call them about burglars or drug dealers, not to tell them you baked some cookies), they develop a skewed perception of the average citizen and... well.

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#114

Post by jancsika »

I don't get the drama here.

Either Odin is mentioned in at least a handful of what Wikipedia considers secondary sources, or it isn't. Just skimming Rust's entry I immediately see stuff like MIT Technology Review and TechCrunch.

There must be (tens of?) thousands of potential secondary sources that could count toward Odin's notability for inclusion on Wikipedia. Is Odin mentioned in any of those?

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#115

Post by jibal »

jibal wrote: post #37
woodruffw wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep up with PL development, and I am only vaguely aware of Odin (and same for Jai and V). (But this isn’t the point: lots of programmers know about relatively obscure thing, but that does not itself make them notable. Notability is a well-defined property on Wikipedia.)

[flagged]

What should be persuasive is a simple logical inference from the statements made to my conclusion.

From the article:

> If you are terminally online on programming circles, you most likely have heard of Odin, it's so obvious that I don't feel like I have to make a case at all. It has been covered by the streamer Primeagen and it's used commercially by JangaFX, that's pretty notable to me.

If you are active in discussions of other systems programming languages like Zig, Nim, Jai, D, V, Hare, C3, etc. then you have heard of Odin. If someone hasn't heard of all of those languages then it's an objective fact that they don't "keep up with PL development".

See for instance https://dev.to/dimension-ai/13-languages-are-challenging-c-m...

Deletion of this article is an indication of inadequate processes at Wikipedia for determining the notability of certain sorts of subjects.

> Notability is a well-defined property on Wikipedia.

This is not true ... if it were then there would not be disputes about notability. And simply reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability makes it clear that it is not "a well-defined property". And beyond that, one of the points being discussed is that Wikipedia's criteria for notability have not adapted to the current state of affairs. If Wikipedia did have a rigid "well-defined property", that would be a mistake.

As GingerBill is quoted as saying in TFA:

> Odin is now being used by dozens of companies, thousands of public projects, and over a million hobbyists.

By a sensible rational evaluation, that makes it notable.

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#116

Post by Dfol »

mberning wrote: post #88
mindcrime wrote: post #86

Wikipedia seems stuck in an antiquated worldview where things like traditionally-published books with second- or third-hand reports of what happened, and which are frequently incomplete or wholly inaccurate, are nonetheless considered more authoritative than primary sources you can find with a ten-second Google search. So much this. Wikipedia's processes and policies are - in ways - an outdated and archaic relic of a…

This happened to me back in college. I authored a couple pages for some bands that I was in to, probably spent weeks pulling together history, lineup, albums, eps, etc. only to have them deleted unceremoniously with no recourse. That was my first and last attempt to contribute to wikipedia.

Same, I understand the editors/admins can't be experts on every topic but just because THEY don't think something is notable doesn't mean most people don't either.

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#118

Post by Dfol »

netbioserror wrote: post #15
w10-1 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In wikipedia-land, I read "primary source" as "motivated source", given their need to prune biased edits.

The fatal flaw here being that secondary sources and tertiary ad infinitum are all always motivated. It's inescapable.

Yep, good point.

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#119

Post by questiona »

Morromist wrote: post #103
mindcrime wrote: post #86

Wikipedia seems stuck in an antiquated worldview where things like traditionally-published books with second- or third-hand reports of what happened, and which are frequently incomplete or wholly inaccurate, are nonetheless considered more authoritative than primary sources you can find with a ten-second Google search. So much this. Wikipedia's processes and policies are - in ways - an outdated and archaic relic of a…

"It's amazing that anybody creates Wikpedia articles at all" Yeh. This is why I stopped editing wikipedia very often. They are maniacal about deleting things that I consider noteworthy but others don't. I still love wikipedia and think its the best website on the internet, but this is probably its biggest flaw.

[flagged]

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#120

Post by chris_wot »

recursivecaveat wrote: post #14
dibujaron wrote: post #5

This article makes Odin sound extremely well-known. I've never heard of it before, and I feel like I keep up with programming topics pretty diligently. Admittedly I don't work at the systems programming layer, but I've definitely heard plenty about Rust and c++ topics. Curious if others feel similarly, or maybe I just happened to miss it?

I would consider it extremely obscure overall. A large majority of programmers would not be aware of its existence. At the same time there are clearly much less popular languages with articles so it is kindof weird to push to delete. (eg: random scheme implementation w/ no releases in 20 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SISC ) I would say that wikipedia broadly favors programming languages as far as notability. Li…

Not more obscure than Brainfuck.
Post reply on HN