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

The Fall of Stack Overflow

observablehq.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 808 posts

Re: The Fall of Stack Overflow

#541

Post by SpikyBlackHard »

kebman wrote: post #436

I used to contribute a lot to Stack Overflow, but then I noticed that I’d get flamed for even asking simple questions; stuff that can really stand between actually getting somewhere with your code, and where a helpful comment could really make a difference. At some point regular replies were replaced by administrators and mods who are seemingly far more interested in finding faults with your question rather than to a…

This specifically happened to me, the second time I asked a question. It may have been warranted, sure, but I put a lot of effort into that question and I got shut down hard. I never logged in again.

My first question turned into a well thumbed tumbleweed.

Re: The Fall of Stack Overflow

#542

Post by bazoom42 »

underdeserver wrote: post #375
cowthulhu wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hilariously, the accepted (I assume by default, not by the asker) answer is flagrantly breaking, like, half a dozen rules and guidelines… but because it’s cynically and unhelpfully crapping on a newbie, it stays up. Or maybe there’s a good reason for it to stay up, but at a glance it sure isn’t a good look. I actually think SO is a great site and resource, but I also think a lot of that is despite the bitter old time…

Oh come on, it's not crapping on a newbie. It's a funny comment that serves as a reflection of the days and weeks this guy spent debugging these kinds of systems. As someone who was a newbie at the time when it was posted, who was looking for a way to parse HTML, I took away that it's just really the wrong way to go about it. I didn't feel crapped on at all.

The question is about tokenizing XHTML, not parsing it into a tree structure like a DOM, which is a critical distinction. Regular expressions are a perfectly valid way to tokenize. This is why the snarky answers does not suggest a better solution - there isnt one!

If you scroll down long enough, you will see answers explaining that. But they arent upvoted as the answers suggesting the questioner is an idiot.

Re: The Fall of Stack Overflow

#543

Post by nottorp »

It's not ChatGPT. It's stuff like:

- do not post a "teach the man how to fish" answer

- closing this question as duplicate because i'm in a hurry and i didn't read that the poor poster has already mentioned the possible duplicates and explained why theirs is different

- do not post an answer with links to the original docs that have context, instead copy/paste 3 lines that don't explain enough here

Basically... it's the moderation.

Re: The Fall of Stack Overflow

#544

Post by School-Cotton »

borland wrote: post #396
cowthulhu wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hilariously, the accepted (I assume by default, not by the asker) answer is flagrantly breaking, like, half a dozen rules and guidelines… but because it’s cynically and unhelpfully crapping on a newbie, it stays up. Or maybe there’s a good reason for it to stay up, but at a glance it sure isn’t a good look. I actually think SO is a great site and resource, but I also think a lot of that is despite the bitter old time…

That answer is only there because it's really old, from the early days of S.O. where people were allowed to ask questions that weren't super serious binary yes/no style. It'd get moderated and deleted in a heartbeat today. A forlorn monument to the cool place that S.O. once was

Maybe I’m just a fun-hating asshole but personally I find this kind of thing annoying, not cool. People are just trying to get work done, not see someone’s attempt at cringey “nerd culture” humor.

Re: The Fall of Stack Overflow

#545

Post by o1y32 »

JohnMakin wrote: post #120
JohnMakin wrote: post #109

The problems I’ve noticed with Stack Overflow are a few and hard for me to narrow down but basically: - google used to return really relevant results for SO, and it stopped doing so at some point a while ago - moderation on SO has gotten progressively more horrible. can’t tell you how many times I found the exact, bizarre question I was asking only to see one comment trying to answer it and then a mod aggressively sh…

here’s a classic SO thread: OP: “how can I accomplish X doing Y?” top voted response: “I wouldnt do X by Y. Instead, I’d consider Z. It’ll do everything X by Y would do, plus these other things.” buried sub comment to top voted response: “that’s not what he asked, to do X by Y (exact solution provided)” then 10 comments blasting the guy who actually answered the question for not doing it the way the top voted answer…

My experience is that the "real" answer depends on the situation. Sometimes one really should use the alternative (e.g. cleaner, more general solution, most updated API), while other times they should address the original question as is (e.g. avoid additional dependency/third-party library).

This is one I ran into recently:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/30196175/const-methods-i...

The question is very clearly formed. The accepted (and currently top) answer does a good job. But at one point the other answer which is badly worded and confusing was at the top. And I don't think it should ever get the top position of the answers.

Re: The Fall of Stack Overflow

#546

Post by School-Cotton »

Lutger wrote: post #442
newaccount74 wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very popular Zalgo answer is a perfect example of this problem [1] The user asks a question that can be answered quite easily, and dozens of people post answers claiming that this is the wrong way to do it and that they should use some other tech to solve the problem. Some people on Stack Overflow care more about showing off how smart they are rather than answering questions, and I think the point system attracts…

The question explicitly invites the kind of witty reflection shown in the accepted answer, by adding: "and what do you think?" As mentioned elsewhere, this is an old question and both the kind of question and answer wouldn't be allowed these days. However, I also fundamentally disagree that questioning the assumptions in a question is unhelpful. You want to solve a problem, find an approach and want help because you…

“You didn’t actually want to do X, here’s how to do Y instead” may indeed be helpful for the beginner who initially asked the question, but it’s very unhelpful for me who finds the page years later actually wanting to do X.

Re: The Fall of Stack Overflow

#547

Post by rjmunro »

sznio wrote: post #351
Eisenstein wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is that oftentimes people who want to do 'X by Y' are actually asking how to accomplish Q. They think 'X by Y' is the solution and get hit by a roadblock, not knowing that it will not help them and they are wasting time. This is called the XY problem and is extremely common on tech related forums and mailing lists. * https://xyproblem.info/

which you can discuss in the comments below the question, instead of polluting the answers.

You can't discuss in the comments unless you have enough reputation. This is IMHO the absolute stupidest feature of Stack Overflow.

Re: The Fall of Stack Overflow

#548

Post by viraptor »

dmje wrote: post #448
geysersam wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are browser extensions for blacklisting domains from your Google searches. I've been so incredibly happy using one if them. If I see one of those despicable content farms I just blacklist it and move on. Often when I search on Google for technical stuff I only get 2 visible results on the first page, 1 SO and 1 documentation. Soooo relaxing. The business reasons why Google doesn't take steps to remove the bad c…

I've been using Kagi[0] for a while now and it's pretty great in general - but also has options to boost up / down / totally ignore certain domains. It also has "lenses" that let you set a context (example: I'm searching for code stuff so just include sites a,b,c). It's really good and IMO more than worth the price. [0] https://kagi.com

Yeah, my Kagi list of content farms / SO clones which are completely dropped from all results keeps growing. On the other hand, searching just SO from Kagi still seems to give decent results.

Re: The Fall of Stack Overflow

#550

Post by School-Cotton »

JimDabell wrote: post #363
JohnMakin wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

here’s a classic SO thread: OP: “how can I accomplish X doing Y?” top voted response: “I wouldnt do X by Y. Instead, I’d consider Z. It’ll do everything X by Y would do, plus these other things.” buried sub comment to top voted response: “that’s not what he asked, to do X by Y (exact solution provided)” then 10 comments blasting the guy who actually answered the question for not doing it the way the top voted answer…

Which is the correct response to this question? > How do I shoot myself in the foot? I’m pointing the gun at my foot and pulling the trigger, but nothing is happening. Is it: > A common reason for guns not firing is that they aren’t loaded. Try loading the gun and trying again. …or is it: > Woah, hang on a sec! What are you trying to achieve exactly? It seems like you are doing something very wrong here. I’m sure the…

The correct answer is obviously the first one. I come to StackOverflow because I want to learn some piece of information about some specific technology, not to be lectured by someone who thinks they know better than me about what I should or shouldn’t be doing (and who is virtually always wrong).
Post reply on HN