How then do you explain DF being #3 from 2007-2021 and #72 from 2021-2025? It’s clearly not blacklisted, but clearly is shitlisted, no?
- You ask leading questions with questionable assertions. E.g., I doubt that for every moment of a 14 year period you were the unquestioned, constant #3 hotness on HN (I've been here for most of that and didn't see a single one?), yet you present this as uncontestable fact.
- You demand that somebody answer the question you think is most interesting instead of addressing the content of their post
- You don't see obvious things in your communication that people might find not really offensive as much as boorish and uninteresting.
From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
How are stories ranked?
The basic algorithm divides points by a power of the time since a story was submitted. Comments in threads are ranked the same way.
Other factors affecting rank include user flags, anti-abuse software, software which demotes overheated discussions, account or site weighting, and moderator action.
I expect there's been an increase in user flags.
BTW "Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading."
Same rule applies for submissions.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
FWIW, I'm a regular reader of your blog and have not flagged any daringfireball submissions. But this article is asking to be flagged. It's a needlessly provocative title and not all that interesting to discuss.
I'd also like to point out a bit of hypocrisy on your part. You don't accept comments on your site. If you want folks to comment on your blog, maybe reconsider hosting the comments yourself?
https://shawnblanc.net/2007/07/why-daring-fireball-is-commen...
https://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/06/16/powazek-comment...
But as you say he should ask @dang for more informations.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12173809
As far as I know, once an article is flagged it cannot become unflagged by user action. Only dang can unflag articles he thinks the community deserves to discuss.
Articles can also become `[dead]` which I think happens automatically for submissions detected as spam. Per dang, users can vouch for such submissions:
Something really in the water the last few years in tech circles. Or maybe just disgruntled as the stock compensation infinite money printer has ended.
Determining that scientifically is going to be near impossible.
Kinda like convincing people to adopt Slashdot's moderation and meta-moderation lol.
Some of it just feels like a small part of a constellation of cultural/society/business leader behavioral changes which are the natural pendulum swing overcorrection from peak +D sentiment in summer 2020 going back to the other end.
This cycle has basically continued ever since Reagan.
Yet there isn't much reward for any fixing.
Which as always, is such a tell from those supposedly all about free speech and no censorship. You have Elon banning whomever he disagrees with or makes him look like a fool, press kicked out or people/companies critical of Trump essentially blackmailed. It's dangerous.
Agreed. (Change in the user base, or in the sentiments of the user base.)
That user base, and its apparent coordination (directed, or emergent), is the main reason I don't engage as much here any more. It's a dirty pool.
1. There was an exponential increase in people talking about FOSS, leveling out in 2021.
2. There's been an exponential decrease in people talking about startups, leveling out in 2021.
With that in mind, remember that there are karma gates to flagging and that you need many fewer flags than upvotes to sink something. My suspicion is that HN had a pretty big culture shift starting around 2016 but really peaking by 2021 that shifted from the old startup, builder focus to its current FOSS, anti-authoritarian mood. In other words the culture that used to be on Slashdot and technical subreddits found its way back onto HN. While the older HN was more homogeneous in its makeup and narrower in its topics it was also a lot less contentious than today's HN is, mirroring the culture found on Reddit and comment sections of tech-focused publications like The Verge. Today's HN is broad, unfocused, and a lot more like a mix of r/technology and r/programming than it used to be.
Flaggers, I suspect, have older HN values. They preferred the narrower focus of the old site and really dislike the highly contentious big comment threads that are on today's HN. It's hard to have proof of this since flaggers only interact by flagging, but it certainly is the opinion that I have as an older user well over the karma threshold to flag. As such I suspect we're seeing a culture clash play out where the flaggers are trying to hold onto older HN values while commenters here are engaging with HN in the way it's considered in the zeitgeist today, namely an alternative to tech subreddits.
Maybe the flaggers will keep the site balanced between the two perspectives but I suspect either the flaggers will get tired and churn.
https://medium.com/p/8234e43dbe4c if posted would not get anything, but the actual url that it redirects to https://medium.com/luminasticity/great-products-of-illuminat... if posted might get some.
DF does not seem to have any problem like that, but it just shows there might be issues that one is unaware about preventing uptake of your posts and instead of going about whining just ask Dang and maybe get an answer.
on edit: sorry, misremembered, not all redirects - link shorteners are the issue.
1. Obviously, a political article on DF is a poor fit
2. But DF's non-political articles are also seemingly pooplisted, even ones that are clearly relevant to HN's audience
3. There have been quite a few political articles from other sites that have gotten traction on DF without being pooplisted
yeah I dunno it doesn't add up to me. i'm not saying it's a conspiracy or anything. perhaps it is just users flagging his articles and not some concerted moderator action.
My question was, has Gruber written enough non-political articles to know?
I counted:
- 25 articles squarely about tech
- 7 about politics, though it should be noted that I counted articles about the Signal leak in this category even though they certainly do involve technology
- 6 that I considered "in the middle"; mostly about Apple's technical choices w.r.t. navigating EU legislation
- 3 "meta" articles about DF sponsorships, podcast links, etc
So yeah, nowhere near "90% less tech articles." Discarding the latter two categories it's 78% tech coverage. And it's not like he was ever 100% tech coverage. It's clearly not sufficient to explain his stuff getting insta-shitcanned off off of HN's front page, and he was getting shitcanned before Trump was elected in 2016 and he ramped up the politics.
So here's a question- if John himself is a lot less interested in Apple, and now prefers to discuss Trump or sports, perhaps Apple is a lot less interesting? I still follow it closely, but I no longer try to discuss WWDC or the September events with people I know because generally there's nothing that affects them. Their Apple devices work fine and the improvements aren't big enough to discuss with non-enthusiats. Apple is still a great company, but like IBM and Microsoft before, Apple is no longer the center of innovation.
Before the years in which you cited his posts were still 100% tech.
So, to recap: your hypothesis is that a perceived shift in focus in January 2025 retroactively affected his placement on HN in previous decades? Does this involve time travel?
https://daringfireball.net/2025/03/something_is_rotten_in_th...
You're "just asking questions" and inventing percentages. The above example is pretty clear.
I bet his overall blog traffic has dipped
That really does not follow, for a couple of reasons.
One:
As Gruber freely admits, maybe his writing just sucks now or HN's interests have shifted away from DF.
This is entirely plausible but if this is the case we'd expect a more gradual decrease of DF engagement on HN and not an abrupt and near-total cessation.
Two:
I do not think that the popularity of "organic" traffic to a website correlates strongly with the engagement on HN. Glance at the HN home page, and what do you see? The overwhelming majority of links are to domains that get an order of magnitude less traffic than DF. The current top two:
- Getting hit by lightning is good for some tropical trees (caryinstitute.org) (98 points)
- Architecture Patterns with Python (cosmicpython.com) (369 points)
- Daringfireball.net: 1M
- CosmicPython.com: 72K
- Caryinstitute.org: 92K
(At the same time I think there is a flag problem on HN. I'd recommend /active for a better view into HN discussions.)
Historically I should be your target group, I'm a Mac user since it was uncool (and tribal), I think I have DF in my subscriptions since NetNewsWire 1. But I'm just not interested anymore, I fell off as a regular reader.
Partly it is topical: I'm rather disinterested in inside baseball or opinions on journalism on Apple. "Claim Chowder" as a concept should have staid in the 2000s, I think. My Apple interests are more in the technical details or in the opinions of the wider Indie Devsphere or how people use their technology. Hence Michael Tsai's blog is my favourite Apple blog.
And where you touch an Apple business aspect I'm often baffled by your reasoning. That your Apple-vs-EU-opinions are rather outlier opinions I don’t need to recap, although I found the tone of your language sometimes going in an off putting weird direction, almost as if those Europeans should not allowed to give themselves laws.
But even when I share the complaint of a critical article of yours there is a fundamental disconnect. Taking your recent "Rotten" post: You closed the article with the hope of someone berating the lower ranks of Apple like Jobs did with MobileMe. I found that sociopathic by Jobs then and I find the suggestion absurd today. Telling the slaves to row harder has never motivated someone, I think.
And even if, the software problem at Apple is managerial. Senior management invented the annual releases, probably for the Christmas season. Senior management started to announce features in advance, pushing them back more and more in the release year. Senior management releases features before they are ready. In my opinions the directly responsible individuals are Federighi and Dye, as good as that hair may be. And for all of it: Cook himself.
Plus: Apple's position has fundamentally changed. Instead of an upstart, it is a trillion-dollar-behemoth. That changes how we look at the company. And the company has deeply changed, like all tech company they become more vertical and insular in their services (“Feudal” is a wrong metaphor, historically speaking, but it goes to an emotional truth). Why should we root for them anymore?
Recently I tried helping someone to get a file from a PC to their iPhone. The best options were either weird file sharing services or an USB stick like a barbarian. I blame Apple. I remember a time when computers could talk to each other, based on shared, open technical standards. Of course I blame Apple.
Those… aren’t even close to the best options. Hell, if they have iCloud it’s a simple upload on a website away at least. There are other easy ways too.
> I blame Apple
Yes, I’m sure you do, taking responsibility is hard for some people.