The fact that this post could raise a coherent counterpoint to the issue is evidence enough of that.
I thought his criticism was valid though. (Not that he cares one bit! ;) ... Both those articles started off assuming that PHP 'won' something, and then tried to explain why by pointing out good things about PHP and its community. Neither of them started by laying down the contest rules, examining all the contenders, and picking a winner... They started with a winner and worked backwards somehow into the aether.
On the other hand, if you just realize headlines are by definition linkbait, you can make the mental substitution of the phrase "became more popular than any other toy language" for the word "won". Suddenly those articles make more sense, even if they become less controversial (or insightful) in the process.
I think what would work better is a pool of links that shows you stuff you might find interesting based on past usage (voting up/down, friending others, etc). Don't show me what's interesting to everybody who reads the site, show me what's interesting to _me_. As Giles has said in the past, I have a need for better filtering mechanisms.
If your purpose is knowledge or worldly depth/breadth, there is probably greater value in doing exactly the opposite. You know best those things which you already like.. so exposure to those ideas you don't already like would provide the greatest bang for the cognitive buck.
If anything, we need less filters. (imo)
Of the 3, HN is the only one that really welcome true contrariness SOMETIMES, but I've still been downmodded for pointing out biases and groupthink here.
And I'm not even an asshole about it.
But if he wants content personalized, Stumbleupon might be a good avenue.
I've been finding exactly the same thing, actually. Usually when I upvote it's because the discussion is interesting, rather than the article.
I don't really have a problem with that though; reddit et al can provide links in topics of immediate interest, but the community still differentiates HN IMO.
Edit: I just created http://jessealdridge.stumbleupon.com/ if anyone is interested in doing this.
I find many more interesting things by just scanning the "new" section. It would be nice if there was some way to have a front page with just the news that I like.
But a system that recommended links from past usage would be interesting (and a fun challenge to do well)
it's not contemptuous, although it may seem contemptible. I just did the math, knew the tactic would become infallible over time, and used it when signs indicated it would succeed.
of course this implicitly challenges your statement that the site's the same as it ever was. I actually don't have any proof to back that up. I think it would actually be reallllllllllllllllly hard to quantify. I could say there's a frog in boiling water effect there, but then there's the possibility that HN aka News.YC simply had a bad day yesterday, and if I had chosen another day for my random return, I could have come away with the impression it was improving.
Ah, the classic claim that there was never any doubt of success. Always works best after the fact.
HN is very predictable, in some ways. It's not predictable with 100% accuracy like digg or reddit.
But, still, HN people have a group identity to a large degree. And if you attack that group identity, the group is interested in the attack and they are ready to circle the wagons.
Both interest and wagon-circling in this context mean upvoting so other people see it.
Hasn't just about everything Giles' written about HN come up on the front page?
How great the just perceptible change can be made to become by making the rate of change extremely slow is a matter that still remains for investigation. It is worthy of note that it has been found possible in 5.25 hours to crush a frog's foot, without a sign that the pressure was felt, by screwing down a button at the rate of 0.03 mm per minute. A similar experiment showed that a live frog can actually be boiled without a movement if the water is heated slowly enough; in one experiment the temperature was raised at the rate of 0.002 Celsius per second, and the frog was found dead at the end of 2.5 hours without having moved.(1) If a frog can be crushed or boiled without any evidence that he has noticed it, it is at least an interesting question of what can be accomplished in this direction with human beings.
(1) The literature on these experiments with frogs includes Heinzmann, Euber die Wirkung sehr allmaliger Aenderungen thermischer Reize auf die Empfindungsnerven, "Archiv f. d. ges. Physiol." (Pfluger), 1872, vi. 222. Fratscher, Euber continuirliche und langsame Nervenreizung, "Jenaische Zeitschrift," 1875, N. F. ii. 130. Sedgwick, On the Variation of Reflex Excitability in the Frog induced by changes of Temperature, "Stud. Biol. Lab., Johns Hopkins Univ.," 1882, 385.
That Garfield submission on the front page, OTOH...
regarding the whole discussion vs. linkroll thing, I have to say the quality of the discussion is one place where Hacker News still really shines. I have no theory to explain that atm.
pg would prefer that not to be the case, and actually frequently edits headlines to "blunt" them.
Vote for my new version control suggestion :-)
hahaha. dude even after I clicked that I had no idea what you were talking about. however, I had to turn off a Greasemonkey script to even find the comments here. I have it set up to automatically block me from seeing whether my posts are on HN or not. if I see them, I read the comments, and get pissed off. so not I'm not still angry but yeah I did get quite mad at the time, whatever it was about.
What GM script are you using?