141–150 of 150 posts
I just asked him the following question: Do you still program? I have always been incredibly interested to find that out.
I was very surprised he said Basic. Of course, he presume he doesn't do much hard core software engineering anymore, but I assumed that family was pretty much a thing of the past (and legacy code).
"Windows 7 or Windows 8? Be honest, Bill." "Higher is better." Probably the funniest part of this entire thread is the slew of comments now trying to establish an out of context quote in response to that: "Higher is better." ~ Bill Gates
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes...I don't think I was clear enough about what I meant, in a statistical sense. I know that upvotes/downvotes are added artificially. I'm saying, it's hard to gauge the real ratio of upvotes to downvotes with this fuzz. The FAQ you linked to gives this example: a submission with 5 upvotes and 3 downvotes may be tweaked to say 23 upvotes and 21 downvotes. So the net number of upvotes remains the same. But the ratio…
>I'm saying, it's hard to gauge the real ratio of upvotes to downvotes with this fuzz. This is the entire point. That said, I wish they'd just ban spammers and give everyone accurate metrics.
The best they can do is make spammers be unclear on if they're having any effect or not, by obscuring votes, or by secretly banning them without them realizing.
It's a tough problem to get right, especially without making the experience worse for everybody else. I think they've found a happy medium.
"Windows 7 or Windows 8? Be honest, Bill." "Higher is better." Probably the funniest part of this entire thread is the slew of comments now trying to establish an out of context quote in response to that: "Higher is better." ~ Bill Gates
I guess Windows 2000 was the high point then...
Wind it back to 98, and you've got it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "moderators" here are just readers and commenters with karma more than 500(including you, I see). How does one email them? >draw parallels with any part of Germany less reputable history Erm, it's about a jury system that failed, not really about German history.
I should clarify; I meant email info.ycombinator. And I said the catch-all about German history because it's still one facet of Germany. It was just a more eloquent way of saying it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I could go a week without someone on HN using the word "fanboy" I'd be a happy man.
Yet, you seem to be okay with the folks who flag this story. What do you call people who go out of their way to flag even product announcements and posts like this? Tech enthusiasts? I'll be happy to use a less abrasive substitute.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I'm saying, it's hard to gauge the real ratio of upvotes to downvotes with this fuzz. This is the entire point. That said, I wish they'd just ban spammers and give everyone accurate metrics.
Are you suggesting they allow spammers? Every time I remove a spammer post I submit it to /r/ReportTheSpammers, and they get killed almost immediately. What else can they do outside of that? Not allow new users to vote and comments? The best they can do is make spammers be unclear on if they're having any effect or not, by obscuring votes, or by secretly banning them without them realizing. It's a tough problem to ge…
... for crying out loud.
>That said, I wish they'd just ban spammers and give everyone accurate metrics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you suggesting they allow spammers? Every time I remove a spammer post I submit it to /r/ReportTheSpammers, and they get killed almost immediately. What else can they do outside of that? Not allow new users to vote and comments? The best they can do is make spammers be unclear on if they're having any effect or not, by obscuring votes, or by secretly banning them without them realizing. It's a tough problem to ge…
>Are you suggesting they allow spammers? ... for crying out loud. >That said, I wish they'd just ban spammers and give everyone accurate metrics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Are you suggesting they allow spammers? ... for crying out loud. >That said, I wish they'd just ban spammers and give everyone accurate metrics.
They do ban spammers. You're implying they don't.
As long as spammers are banned, there's no reason to screw up a site feature for everyone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had dinner with Bill a few times in the 1980s. Discussions were intense. Somewhat too much of trying to prove ourselves (both our faults). I only talked once w/ Steve for a couple of minutes, in the same era. He seemed like a jerk.
Any funny stories you'd care to share from those experiences?