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

Most of What We Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 332 posts

Re: Most of What We Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People

#141

Post by qwerty9876 »

One interesting thing regarding this was when Reddit added a "chat with a random user" -feature a few years back. I was so used to the high quality submissions and comment threads that when I was paired to chat with random lurkers it was kind of eye opening how they were just... really plain and hard to hold a interesting conversation with.

And this is exactly why communism will NEVER work: 90% of the population just won't be able to produce anything of value by themselves. They just lack the "business instinct" or "drive to hustle" or whatever you want to call it. Is it environmental? genetic? cultural? I don't know, but if you forcefully stop the "creator class" in favor of the 90%, what you will see happening is exactly what happened to the Soviet economy after WW2.

Re: Most of What We Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People

#142

Post by whatshisface »

keithwhor wrote: post #4

Yes. Most of the content you watch on TV was written and acted by outliers. The products you use and consume were crafted, marketed and even distributed by outliers. First, when zoomed out, outliers in all possible tasks become more common — internet commenting is just a subset for silly folks like me. Secondly, the emergent human social fabric is built to recognize and amplify outspoken and / or talented outliers, v…

The difference between outlier actors and outlier Wikipedia editors are that outlier actors are better than everyone else at acting, but outlier Wikipedia editors need only be superhumanly obsessive. It used to be that the way in which you were an outlier had to be somewhat related to being good at the task you were competing for the honor of completing, but on social networks the only qualification is that you spend all day doing it.

Re: Most of What We Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People

#143

Post by IggleSniggle »

PezzaDev wrote: post #83
Kaveren wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if you're willing to make a 3rd comment, but I'm trying to understand the lurker mindset from the perspective of someone who posts quite actively. Is is just that you don't care enough to reply, feel like your opinions are unpopular, don't feel like you have anything to say, or something else?

I realise the irony of claiming I only lurk by writing this, but I'm fighting my habits to help illuminate those interested. For me personally, I just don't care and don't get any reward in the idea of conversing with some random person on the internet. The chances are, I'll never see you again on here or irl, remember your online name (I remember faces, not names), or you will have any real impact in my day to day l…

The privacy issue is real. I am not a lurker here, but every time I comment anywhere online a voice in my head says “it is not rational to do this. This mostly works against your self-interest.” However, I am not someone who is primarily driven by self-interest.

Re: Most of What We Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People

#144

Post by castlecrasher2 »

teddyh wrote: post #116
NeedMoreTea wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went through an almost identical process with English Wikipedia many years ago. Added to a sorely incomplete entry with carefully written and sourced info, to find it gone a few days later. Tried a few tiny updates in case new users were restricted somehow (this was never made obvious), so simply corrected some obvious grammar and spelling mistakes. Nearly all of those were backed out too. At which point there's on…

Nobody with stories such as yours seem to actually give a link to the article in question.

yeah all these accounts of Wikipedia being hostile to new users must be lies and exaggerations /s

Re: Most of What We Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People

#145

Post by walljm »

segfaultbuserr wrote: post #23
chrisco255 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still think it's surprising that there are so many lurkers who literally never engage in the discussion, considering the barriers to do so are so low.

I've been lurking on Hacker News for (at least) two years before deciding to participate: I would visit the homepage daily, read some interesting news and comments, and finally leave the site. It's pointless to comment if one cannot add new information, perspectives, arguments, or humors to the thread, as a result, one really needs to make an effort to engage in the discussion. In practice, it means you'll need a pro…

exactly

Re: Most of What We Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People

#146

Post by Klover »

PezzaDev wrote: post #83
Kaveren wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if you're willing to make a 3rd comment, but I'm trying to understand the lurker mindset from the perspective of someone who posts quite actively. Is is just that you don't care enough to reply, feel like your opinions are unpopular, don't feel like you have anything to say, or something else?

I realise the irony of claiming I only lurk by writing this, but I'm fighting my habits to help illuminate those interested. For me personally, I just don't care and don't get any reward in the idea of conversing with some random person on the internet. The chances are, I'll never see you again on here or irl, remember your online name (I remember faces, not names), or you will have any real impact in my day to day l…

Funny. I was writing a comment in reply to this and then I thought “ah what does it matter” and removed it.

Re: Most of What We Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People

#147

Post by n_e »

DanBC wrote: post #86
commoner wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The username policy is quite simple. A username: 1. Must represent a single person, not a company, organization, website, band, partnership, or other group of people 2. Must not be deceptive or impersonate someone else 3. Must not be unreasonably long 4. Must not be inflammatory or imply that you intend to troll If you create an account that doesn't meet this policy, an administrator will prevent you from editing unt…

> an administrator will prevent you from editing until you choose a new username, and you can continue afterward. No, an admin may instantly block you permanently, or may temporarily block you until you change your name, or may temporarily block you while they discuss it with you, or may not block you but apply one of two templates, or add your name to a username for discussion board where you'll have to try to justi…

> Reads some stuff about his company. He knows that information is factually incorrect. It's not harmful to his company, but it is misleading to people reading Wikipedia. He signs up for an account.

The only interactions I had with Wikipedia are reading articles. Even I know it is frowned upon to edit your own articles.

Re: Most of What We Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People

#148

Post by nogbit »

Kaveren wrote: post #20
sigttou wrote: post #10

Am here for over 2 years now, rarely upvote something, haven't submitted anything and this is just my 2nd comment... Pretty sure this rule holds for close to all kind of forums.

I don't know if you're willing to make a 3rd comment, but I'm trying to understand the lurker mindset from the perspective of someone who posts quite actively. Is is just that you don't care enough to reply, feel like your opinions are unpopular, don't feel like you have anything to say, or something else?

I've been reading almost daily since probably the beginning. I comment very rarely. Most news in general is garbage, but I do enjoy tech + startup news and enjoy reading comments here before clicking on to the source. It's fast, simple and I use http://hckrnews.com as my portal into ycombinator.com.

I almost left during the year of the US primaries as the news was majority political and simply more garbage, so I'm glad that got cleaned up.

Often I don't have anything "more" to say on top of what has been said, so I wont add noise. That may be a common thread with lurkers. When I do have a unique perspective and I feel adds value and not noise I may comment, keyword is "may".

I couldn't care less about karma, popularity, social scores or the like (just more garbage). As long as this site and it's users continue to provide value to me by filtering and aggregating tech news I will continue to use it.

Just another lurker mooching off of non lurkers. Selfish yes, but it works.

Re: Most of What We Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People

#149

Post by [deleted] »

dade_ wrote: post #113

I think this behaviour is caused by the wrath of the hivemind. I imagine that it is common in reddit users to have a separate account for posting as an insurance against hivemind rage which can be invoked easily for unexpected reasons. And for others, it is easier to not get involved, get the value from the answers and comments you find. Avoid the abuse and emotional mud slinging. Life is too short. Same for Twitter.

[deleted]

Re: Most of What We Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People

#150

Post by [deleted] »

whatshisface wrote: post #142
keithwhor wrote: post #4

Yes. Most of the content you watch on TV was written and acted by outliers. The products you use and consume were crafted, marketed and even distributed by outliers. First, when zoomed out, outliers in all possible tasks become more common — internet commenting is just a subset for silly folks like me. Secondly, the emergent human social fabric is built to recognize and amplify outspoken and / or talented outliers, v…

The difference between outlier actors and outlier Wikipedia editors are that outlier actors are better than everyone else at acting, but outlier Wikipedia editors need only be superhumanly obsessive. It used to be that the way in which you were an outlier had to be somewhat related to being good at the task you were competing for the honor of completing, but on social networks the only qualification is that you spend…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN