Conan O'Brien at Google: The World Has Completely Changed
blogs.sfweekly.com
blogs.sfweekly.com
He didn't seem to handle the limitations of that venue well. When he couldn't use his wit full on, he degraded quickly to mostly slapstick. Which was pretty unfunny coming from him.
Yeah, not really worth it unless you are a fan of him. The only HN related thing I heard was a bit about twitter at ~15:00+.
Note to self: If you ever asked a question at such event, step back from the microphone so your nervous laughter does not disturb.
(I did upvote you, because while I think a score of 0 is OK, I don't see why you should be at -1 just for expressing your opinion)
↑ Insightful/Agree ------ Insightful/Disagree ↑
| |
| |
↓ Uninsightful/Agree -- Uninsightful/Disagree ↓
Seeing how the intent with the points are insightfulness (afaik) but often they are used to express agreement.P.S. I found the video hilarious :)
At least in my test, which was admittedly very small in scale, people almost always clicked "Insightful/Agree" or "Uninsightful/Disagree". I'd love to see a better test of this, though.
That’s very much what I would expect. You generally disagree with someone because you think they have poor arguments – how could something that is, say, factually wrong or not coherent also be insightful? I always cringe when people here say you shouldn’t downvote when you disagree. Should you really not downvote if a comment contains obvious factual errors or if the arguments obviously make no sense? (I have to add, though, that the “obvious” is important here. I think you shouldn’t downvote when someone made reasonable errors in their argument.)
I think there are cases where comments you disagree with can be insightful (when, say, a aspect of a problem is shown that you didn’t consider before) but I would also argue that those instances are rather rare.
It seems like clicking "Uninsightful/Agree" is agreeing that I believe things that are uninsightful? I imagine that would be the least used option.
Insightful/Disagree seems like a contradiction. If someone has stated a conclusion that I think is wrong, how could I see those opinions as containing notable insights?
He was still funny enough in that setting to make it work - in the 12:30 slot, anyways.
Who else was astonished at the hair-ball question? I mean, I know it's a casual atmosphere, but that was a seriously stupid question.
I can accept that you might not find him funny but I can't accept anyone implying he's not a good guy.