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

Dreadnought hoax

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 45 posts

Re: Dreadnought hoax

#31

Post by TeMPOraL »

tedks wrote: post #30
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's merely supposed to be 'of interest' to hackers. Clearly it was, for some at least. Should we flag articles about space telescopes, or medical devices? Just because they're not strictly about computers?

Typically the space telescopes and medical devices articles are related to startups. Those are okay. Startups and tech, that's the bread and butter of hacker news. Anything else is just weird and I don't see why anyone would post about it or read it. What does it matter what some british kids did in the 1850s or whenever? It doesn't help anyone become a better entrepreneur or hacker.

> It doesn't help anyone become a better entrepreneur or hacker.

I disagree. Such stunts are well-known tradition in hacker culture as well.

Re: Dreadnought hoax

#32

Post by potatolicious »

jstalin wrote: post #23

Of course, such a stunt today would result in criminal charges of "terrorism" and lengthy prison sentences, all the while politicians would excoriate the hoaxers as enemies of the state.

Probably not - or rather, such a stunt by anyone else would've resulted in criminal charges and lengthy prison sentences back then also.

Note that this stunt was performed by a group of young aristocrats who went to Cambridge. At least one of the participants was nobility, another whose father was a well-known politician.

Imagine the same happening in the US today - a group of wealthy Harvard kids execute an embarrassing prank, one of whom comes from a famous industrialist family and the other the son of a major Washington figure.

The whole thing would be declared "youthful indiscretions" and no punishment of any substance would be handed out.

The more things change the more they stay the same. If you are wealthy and well-connected you can get away with damn well anything, and everyone else gets screwed.

Re: Dreadnought hoax

#33

Post by kelvin0 »

StavrosK wrote: post #7
louhike wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting in which sense? Even if I liked it, it is only humor and does not have nothing to do with "hackers". I'm not a better developper or I do not know what will help to launch a startup after reading this. Hacker News is not the Huffington Post.

Hacker news is not developer news or startup news. I'm a hacker, and I liked this, therefore it should be here. Read the site's mission statement.

Of course hackers all like the same things, and you represent them perfectly? Therefore what you judge relevant is also hacker relevant ... nice.

Re: Dreadnought hoax

#34

Post by StavrosK »

kelvin0 wrote: post #33
StavrosK wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hacker news is not developer news or startup news. I'm a hacker, and I liked this, therefore it should be here. Read the site's mission statement.

Of course hackers all like the same things, and you represent them perfectly? Therefore what you judge relevant is also hacker relevant ... nice.

I'm telling you why I upvoted it. If I don't represent hackers perfectly, why are you asking me?

Re: Dreadnought hoax

#35

Post by smacktoward »

hga wrote: post #14
ethagknight wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternatively, it could have served as a pressure relief valve.

Probably neither; critically, by then France on its own wasn't a match for Germany, no matter how much they lusted for revenge for the 1870 Franco-Prussian war and recapture of the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine. As one book I'm reading notes, of the great powers, only France and Russia has a desire to upset the status quo (Russia was motivated, as always, by a desire for a secure warm water port, and this time, by…

> of the great powers, only France and Russia has a desire to upset the status quo

That wasn't really the case, though; during this period Germany was very busy upsetting the status quo by expanding their navy, which directly challenged the UK's position as the world's pre-eminent naval power.

Re: Dreadnought hoax

#37

Post by hga »

smacktoward wrote: post #35
hga wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably neither; critically, by then France on its own wasn't a match for Germany, no matter how much they lusted for revenge for the 1870 Franco-Prussian war and recapture of the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine. As one book I'm reading notes, of the great powers, only France and Russia has a desire to upset the status quo (Russia was motivated, as always, by a desire for a secure warm water port, and this time, by…

> of the great powers, only France and Russia has a desire to upset the status quo That wasn't really the case, though; during this period Germany was very busy upsetting the status quo by expanding their navy, which directly challenged the UK's position as the world's pre-eminent naval power.

I count these differently. It comes down to intent vs. capability: was Germany intending anything more than becoming a greater power (I'm still reading up on this)? As a serious nation the UK of course had to react to the increased capability, but I view this as qualitatively different than France's crystal clear intent of taking back Alsace and Lorraine, which also was backed up by some serious capability.

Russia intended to help the Balkan nations stay out of the non-Slavic (in terms of rule) Austrian-Hungarian empire, however their capability to directly affect this was limited by geography (again, something I'm in the process of reading up on).

(There's also the forward looking detail: France was a declining nation (e.g. declining birthrate), Germany a growing nation. That put a time limit on their capability to carry out their intent.)

Re: Dreadnought hoax

#38

Post by CanSpice »

tedks wrote: post #28
RankingMember wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I wanted to stretch it, I'd say that these young fellas "hacked" the English to achieve their goal, but, really, isn't life a little more interesting when things don't always go according to script, e.g. not every post on HN is another "Powder and Diaper Your Baby with Rust"-esque post?

>but, really, isn't life a little more interesting when things don't always go according to script, e.g. not every post on HN is another "Powder and Diaper Your Baby with Rust"-esque post? If I wanted to read about random factoids, I'd go to /r/TIL. I come here for Rust. I flagged the OP FWIW because it's not related to hacking and it's not even news.

Downvote it and move on.

Re: Dreadnought hoax

#39

Post by kelvin0 »

CanSpice wrote: post #38
tedks wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but, really, isn't life a little more interesting when things don't always go according to script, e.g. not every post on HN is another "Powder and Diaper Your Baby with Rust"-esque post? If I wanted to read about random factoids, I'd go to /r/TIL. I come here for Rust. I flagged the OP FWIW because it's not related to hacking and it's not even news.

Downvote it and move on.

Stay calm and Wave

Re: Dreadnought hoax

#40

Post by tedks »

CanSpice wrote: post #38
tedks wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but, really, isn't life a little more interesting when things don't always go according to script, e.g. not every post on HN is another "Powder and Diaper Your Baby with Rust"-esque post? If I wanted to read about random factoids, I'd go to /r/TIL. I come here for Rust. I flagged the OP FWIW because it's not related to hacking and it's not even news.

Downvote it and move on.

...you can't downvote posts. I flagged it, which is similar. I came to the comments to see why it was posted, and responded to the comment I did to elucidate the viewpoint of people who don't like this being posted.

Why comment at all? Just downvote/upvote and move on.

Post reply on HN