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

Dogescript

zachbruggeman.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–147 of 147 posts

Re: Dogescript

#141

Post by codezero »

cam_l wrote: post #140
codezero wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Derision is an alternative form of extremism. If the target is an extremist, they will use it as an example of their point of view being dismissed and suppressed. If they are being sarcastic, it will rile them into persisting.

Ha, I think I actually disagree with each of your points individually. But it is a persuasive argument, because the idea is always only as good as the outcome. Derision is not extremism, that is to bastardise the meaning of both words. If the target is an extremist, I absolutely think their view should be dismissed and suppressed. However making fun of their point of view - particularly in mistaking their argument fo…

Extremist is a relative definition though.

When reacting to people and teasing/making fun of them or deriding them, keep this in mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allport's_Scale

Re: Dogescript

#142

Post by cam_l »

steveklabnik wrote: post #94
cam_l wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to make an addendum to Poe's Law - a formal accepted response / solution to the dilemma. An extremist point of view should always be taken as sarcasm (or more accurately, as pisstake). Extremism should be derided as facile and ridiculous, but kind of funny - just like sarcasm. It is absurd whether the proponent regards it as such or not and as such should be treated with the sense of humour it deserves.

"Extremist" points of view are relative to the audience. At one point, scientists were 'extremists.'

This is not about truth or absolutes, relativity is just not relevant. It is simply that where the line between sarcastic or extremist points of view is indeterminable, they necessarily tend toward the facile and/or ridiculous - and the correct response in this case is humour.

In regards to your example, the broad assumption that they ever were regarded as such is predicated on the fact that they tend to present their findings before their research. Extreme findings, if they are facile, ridiculous, and also kind of funny, deserve derision in the absence of research to back them. Once the research is presented, the minutiae of proof of cause and effect shifts the relative position of the audience to occupy previously questionable ground.

Wow, I obviously put way too much thought into what was a just stray musing ;)

Re: Dogescript

#143

Post by cam_l »

codezero wrote: post #141
cam_l wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ha, I think I actually disagree with each of your points individually. But it is a persuasive argument, because the idea is always only as good as the outcome. Derision is not extremism, that is to bastardise the meaning of both words. If the target is an extremist, I absolutely think their view should be dismissed and suppressed. However making fun of their point of view - particularly in mistaking their argument fo…

Extremist is a relative definition though. When reacting to people and teasing/making fun of them or deriding them, keep this in mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allport's_Scale

Not deriding them, just deriding a particular point of view.. and doing so with humour.

See above re: relativity.. plus I would note that the very definition of extremism means it is only relative insofar as it is a long way from everything else, which pretty much rules out edge cases. Allport's Scale was new to me, thanks!

Re: Dogescript

#144

Post by codezero »

cam_l wrote: post #143
codezero wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Extremist is a relative definition though. When reacting to people and teasing/making fun of them or deriding them, keep this in mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allport's_Scale

Not deriding them , just deriding a particular point of view.. and doing so with humour. See above re: relativity.. plus I would note that the very definition of extremism means it is only relative insofar as it is a long way from everything else, which pretty much rules out edge cases. Allport's Scale was new to me, thanks!

Ah, I advocate deriding content, but it's very easy to slip from content to the person :)

Re: Dogescript

#145

Post by girvo »

victorf wrote: post #120
jamesaguilar wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things stop being funny over time. There's no reason to be concerned. There will always be a next funny thing, and there's really very little you can do about it.

I'm not concerned. This was my response to the claim that it is "very much in the hacker spirit". I find it neither utile nor humorous. I think compiling it to Javascript is trivial and not worth our attention.

While I may disagree with your conclusion here, I'm quite chuffed that I have now learnt a new word: "utile". Neat!

Re: Dogescript

#146

Post by polroger »

victorf wrote: post #79
steveklabnik wrote: post #7

What's funny about this is that every comment here is calling this useless, yet it's something that's very much in the hacker spirit. Utility is not the end goal of everything.

I recall when LOL Cats were actually pretty funny, way back around "I has a flavor". Then people who didn't understand the language [1] overran the Internet with cats that had incredible vocabularies and immaculate grammar (they just didn't know how to spell and were evil). The only thing that bothers me about Dogescript is that the joke is too forced. The typical Shibe pictures are just "wow", "such X", "very Y", "w…

You do realize that the first "doge"-image macro used more words than "wow", "aah", "so x", "very y", right?

http://cdn.runt-of-the-web.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/...

While I agree with you that this is forced and cancerous, it's pointless to care about it.

Re: Dogescript

#147

Post by thrillgore »

dpcan wrote: post #49

I like it. And I always wondered why a programming language couldn't exist to work as follows: Start Run at 60 frames per second and do Clear the screen Draw a rectangle at (10,10) with size (100,50) and rotate it 20 degrees Repeat End Or something along those lines - hopefully you get my point. This would be fun for prototyping. I could just speak to my computer and have it translate my plain english into a working…

Anyone here old enough to remember COBOL? It pretty much was rather plain english for a turing-complete language.

Not as elegant as Dogescript obviously

Post reply on HN