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

Oh, 2022

antipope.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 557 posts

Re: Oh, 2022

#51

Post by fragmede »

maxerickson wrote: post #42
ska wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may be a bit harsh, but nobody owes you a conversation and people with a ton of followers have to do something to manage the SNR. It's not obvious what the right answer is, and almost anything you do will have false positives.

There's nothing in my comment that implies I think anybody owes me a conversation. I can see hitting mute on accounts that make uninteresting comments, I'm not sure why you'd block someone that comments on ~1 tweet and isn't being persistent or otherwise antagonistic (I suppose it can be better curation to block).

Because it's not one tweet. Or at least, it's one tweet from you, but a popular author like cstross probably gets hundreds a day from randoms.

Re: Oh, 2022

#52

Post by tptacek »

maxerickson wrote: post #13
jodrellblank wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's also a HN user: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=cstross

He'll block you on twitter for politely quibbling with his presentation of facts.

More people should block on Twitter. Blocking is far preferable, in an environment like Twitter, to pointless hostile misunderstanding. It's a bad look to dunk on someone for blocking you; just let them block and get on with your life. Pay it forward when someone pokes you on Twitter with a question you can tell is going to pull you into a time-wasting cortisol spike.

Re: Oh, 2022

#53

Post by 41b696ef1113 »

rcarmo wrote: post #5
elkos wrote: post #2

Charlie Stross is a hard science fiction author, I believe his works (like Accelerado) have been quite influential and inspiring for many hn users. I believe it could be interesting to discuss his (pessimistic) take on this year.

He is by far one of the most interesting bloggers on my RSS feeds, and I would also recommend reading the comments - in which he participates actively.

For anyone else who went hunting for the feed[0]

[0] http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/atom.xml

Re: Oh, 2022

#54

Post by ZeroGravitas »

maxerickson wrote: post #13
jodrellblank wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's also a HN user: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=cstross

He'll block you on twitter for politely quibbling with his presentation of facts.

I'm not a twitter user, but this is the equivalent of "I'm not interested in being notified if this person contacts me again" right?

Like me putting a Gmail rule in place to move messages from a specific source, say a specific mailing list thread that I'm not interested in out of my inbox.

Is this considered taboo on Twitter?

Re: Oh, 2022

#55

Post by walrus01 »

TigeriusKirk wrote: post #16

Asking because I have no idea - Will other mRNA vaccines have short-lived efficacy like the covid one does? Will you need an AIDS vaccine booster every six months?

I don't think it's quite accurate to say the existing mRNA vaccines are not effective, because the rate of hospitalization and rate of ICU admissions per capita for double-vaccinated people, vs unvaccinated people is really clear.

The data is showing that the likelihood of severe illness in a delta or omicron-infected person who previously had both doses of vaccine is significantly less.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2786039

Re: Oh, 2022

#56

Post by tptacek »

maxerickson wrote: post #43
ceejayoz wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This? https://twitter.com/maxerickson/status/685506107695972352 Anyone with that many followers is likely going to disengage with low-effort replies of that nature. It adds nothing of consequence to the lengthy post it is correcting.

Mute though. And I learned something about his concern over accuracy. For instance, reddit hasn't quite lived in the shadow of Conde Nast in the meantime.

It's clear you should have blocked each other just from this conversation on HN. You weren't messaging him to have a conversation; you were looking for some kind of gratifying acknowledgement of your disagreement. I'm not saying you were wrong (I can't imagine spending the energy to even figure out what it is you disagree with him about); I'm saying it doesn't matter, shouldn't matter, and the block was a favor to both of you.

That you'd be wound up about it five years later speaks volumes to how unhealthy the exchange between the two of you was.

Re: Oh, 2022

#57

Post by tptacek »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #54
maxerickson wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He'll block you on twitter for politely quibbling with his presentation of facts.

I'm not a twitter user, but this is the equivalent of "I'm not interested in being notified if this person contacts me again" right? Like me putting a Gmail rule in place to move messages from a specific source, say a specific mailing list thread that I'm not interested in out of my inbox. Is this considered taboo on Twitter?

It is both a primary, first-class feature of Twitter and something a lot of people feel should be a taboo.

Re: Oh, 2022

#58

Post by maxerickson »

tptacek wrote: post #52
maxerickson wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He'll block you on twitter for politely quibbling with his presentation of facts.

More people should block on Twitter. Blocking is far preferable, in an environment like Twitter, to pointless hostile misunderstanding. It's a bad look to dunk on someone for blocking you; just let them block and get on with your life. Pay it forward when someone pokes you on Twitter with a question you can tell is going to pull you into a time-wasting cortisol spike.

I don't think I was dunking. Griping at the most (and I've made the block vs mute point). I agree that it's time wasting and I've tried to pull out of this thread so as to not waste more time of other people.

Re: Oh, 2022

#60

Post by wombatpm »

tome wrote: post #48
maxerickson wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mute though. And I learned something about his concern over accuracy. For instance, reddit hasn't quite lived in the shadow of Conde Nast in the meantime.

Yes, muting seems far less aggressive than blocking to me. For one thing the mutee doesn't even know it has happened. I don't quite understand why some Twitter users seems to take delight in announcing they have blocked someone.

Muting saves you from the annoyance, but still subjects your followers.
Post reply on HN