> Bullshit. Shoddy analogy at best, wilfully stupid attention whoring at worst.
how did you get so many karma points using such coarse language? It brings down the level of discourse.
how did you get so many karma points using such coarse language? It brings down the level of discourse.
Also, if you look at my comment history, I don't habitually use "such coarse language". I only use it in appropriate circumstances - like in response to this article. The coarse language has little to do with the karma.
Edit: worth noting that the title of the article on Guardian is "Facebook will lose 80% of its users by 2017", not may. That has been editorialised by the submitter. The article is even worse than you may think if all you read was the title.
When you recognize insane patterns and connections, much like an Artist as opposed to a Scientist, things can work. All that needs to matter is that the intuition has to be right. The science can come after.
What a great way to communicate.
Another pretty poor analogy, I suppose. I can see why you liked the article. </sheldon-joke-mode>
Is there a name for the phenomenon that the first entries in any contested ranking tend to be less interesting?
There's something about the ranking systems used on the web in the way they tally the nearly-effort-free actions of hordes (clicks, likes, upvotes, star ratings) that means they represent one kind of magnitude (statistical average impulse behavior) but very little of another (deeper reflection & significance). Deeper stuff tends to see less impulse attention and therefore sinks down the ranking, but is there some other way to identify it?
Not everyone will like Thelonious Monk, and the same people who like him might not like Americana or electro house or black metal. But no one complains about smooth or cool jazz. No one complains about mainstream country. No one complains about techno, no one complains about hard rock on the radio. They're watered down, appeal to wide audiences, and are non-offensive in their broad market. It takes no effort to like mainstream culture, and it doesn't demand anything from your intellectually. You're going to like the Billboard Hot 100, or at the very least you're not going to hate it, because it's been manufactured to be liked by everyone.
Same thing with high rated comments in a lot of cases. While the poster might not actually be saying anything, might not have a point, might not have any intellectual depth to their comment, their comment offended no one, was easy to understand, and can be appreciated at face value without needing to think about it. If you can get people to like your ideas without making them think, you're going to be popular. If you make them think, they have the chance to decide if they like what you're saying or not, and if you make them think, you give them the chance to decide that they don't like you.
'The fanatics are picturesque; mankind prefers to see gestures rather than hear reasons.'
Sturgeon's Law, maybe.