Hacker News Reader

Comment by ryeguy_24 | Hacker News Reader

Merry Christmas HN. Ever year, the original T * sin(t) Christmas tree gets posted. This year, I wanted to call out my favorite modification by Silvia Hao. It’s beautiful. One year, I’ll try to add to its beauty. But for now, I’ll just appreciate it. She posted it here: https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/175891

View on HN

I checked the post, but it's from someone who's far more comfortable with Mathematica than I am, so I hope you won't mind my asking about the maths.

First, the T vs. t in T * sin(t) doesn't mean anything, right? Second, the ' in the title T * sin(t)' doesn't belong, right?

Then I think that this is graphing essentially (t * sin(t), t * cos(t), t + something), which is a cone if the something is constant, which I believe it is—and that certainly matches the graph. And the rest is about choosing an aesthetically pleasing step size and accomplishing the lovely twinkling and colors, right?

I added the prime in the title to indicate that this version is a bit different from the original t * sin(t) post.

OK, thanks. Is the rest of it right?

Silvia Hao's version is the one submitted here to HN, actually.

Someone was too excited about Santa to actually you know click the link

The GP commenter (ryeguy_24) is the original poster of this article, leaving additional information about what they posted.

Yeah, and? That was the link that was not clicked. If the person had clicked that link they would have seen why their comment was not helpful.

I think you still misunderstood. ryeguy_24 was *commenting on their own post*

They obviously clicked the link, because they posted it.

You still think my comment was about ryeguy instead of the person I replied which is typically how comments flow. If they had clicked the link and read it, they would have seen why ryeguy posted the link that shows the evolution from the ‘original’. I’m really not sure why we’re unable here

To the point, they even admitted “guilty as charged”. I mean, what’s the cause of the lack of comprehension?

To beat this dead horse some more, I *had* clicked the link (how else would I know it was Silvia Hao's version that had been submitted?) and *had* read the username of the commenter of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42506146. What I had *not* read was the username of the submitter, and thus did not realize the commenter and submitter were the same person, which recontextualizes the comment in question from "Personally my favorite version is Silvia Hao's that can be found in this discussion thread" to "This image that I submitted is by Silvia Hao and can be found in this discussion thread".

Some was too excited about Santa to, you know, read the usernames of the submitter and commenter

Some kind of Pareto Principle: 80% of people read 20% of the usernames.

Wrong. It says that 20% of people will argue with you and be confident that they are right even though they are more wrong.

Pareto victim right here

> Pareto victim right here

I'm pretty sure deskr was making a joke.

I chuckled

100% of the people I live with will argue with me 20% of the time and be wrong 80% of those times.

Guilty as charged.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com