Hacker News Reader

Comment by cagenut | Hacker News Reader

I didn't make it past the first paragraph because I really can't stand the worst logic flaw in web performance being turned into a worldview. Hiding glaring flaws behind averages by just trying to overwhelm the average with a much higher volume of "good" traffic.

If poverty is an error, then a 60% error rate on 1 billion requests and a 10% error rate on 6 billion requests is the exact same thing for those people.

View on HN

You should look at the data and not invent some silly comparisons to error rates. Poverty is declining both in absolute and relative terms.

There is less poor people now than there was 10 years ago.

https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty

Those data on poverty are a joke! Read for example: https://www.jasonhickel.org/blog/2019/4/27/200-years-to-end-...

It's basically the World Bank covering its ass for its own spectacular failure.

> If poverty is an error, then a 60% error rate on 1 billion requests and a 10% error rate on 6 billion requests is the exact same thing.

I can't conceive of the mental contortions you must have forced yourself into to conclude that a world of 600 million people, all in abject poverty, is just as good the world we live in now.

edited in a "for those people" to be clearer.

Yeah, but the other people matter too...

> If poverty is an error, then a 60% error rate on 1 billion requests and a 10% error rate on 6 billion requests is the exact same thing.

No. They are not the same thing. Error rate does not automatically drop when requests grow. The number of errors remains the same, but the number of "good" increases, how is that "the exact same thing"?

Also, 1 billion world population was in 1800s, at that time poverty rate was 80%.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com