corwinstephen

On a forum like Hackernews where the purpose of the entire thing is to gain knowledge and expand wisdom, it's perfectly reasonable to expect people not to post things when they have no clue what they're talking about. If the guy had posted an opinion based on fact, it would have been fair game, but this particular opinion was based on nothing more than colloquial beliefs which perpetuate fallacy.

In my opinion, he was right to criticize. If he hadn't, I'd be going around telling people about how my brain is becoming dopamine tolerant due to the bursts of it I get every time I watch porn. I'm glad I know that's not true.

Right? I've found a multitude of scenarios in which it does well like skiing (check the snowpack and quality before you go) and nightclubs (see if people are having fun inside or if its totally whack before you pay to get in).

What about curiosity about an unsolved riddle/puzzle?

Also, does anyone else feel like people on Hackernews too often leave comments that deliberately go against the general consensus in a weak attempt to get up votes from fringe users?

I agree with all the other comments here. You're trying to be that guy who eschews curiosity in an attempt to be mature, but that is not and never has been the type of mentality that leads to success, be it in software or any other field. Curiosity leads to creativity, and creativity leads to success. To swim against the current on this one is hardly admirable.

A while back a hackernews dude posted a rendering of the Mona Lisa in pure CSS. I thought it was cool until I realized that if you scale your divs down to 1x1 pixels, you can literally create anything you want with CSS, perfect to the pixel. At that point the novelty wore off. Yeah, if your image is based upon flat surfaces and minimal design, you can probably make a CSS version of it with a smaller file size than a png, but it's certainly going to take you a lot longer, and considering all the people with older browsers wont even be able to see it (they'll be looking at a nightmare of jagged corners and missing drop shadows), is it even worth the milliseconds you're going to save by shaving off a few kilobytes?

I think "____________ in pure CSS" posts should be banned from hackernews as uninteresting novelty.

True, you're generalizing when you say "Europeans are...", but you would also be generalizing if you said "Americans are...", "San Franciscans are...", "Rich people are...", "Programmers are...", and so on and so forth for any group of people you can think of. Talking about a group of people is generalizing, and generalizing is a necessary part of life, because despite the fact that doing so may cause untrue things to be said about certain people, it is also true that generalizations are true about more people than they are untrue about. That's why they're called generalizations.

People say "vc's in the bay area understand startups." Is this universally true? Of course not. But am I ignorant for saying so? Not in the slightest, because in more cases than not, it is true.

So yeah, the guy's statements might not be holistically accurate, but who's are? He's offering guidlines, and I believe that's fair.

Disclosure: I have not yet had the pleasure of visiting Europe. It is possible that my opinions might change after experiencing life there firsthand.

His point was that leaving assistance to charities is a safe way out of saying, "I'm not sure how to fix this problem right now, so I'd rather just not do anything." Again, you're taking his valid points and turning them into unfounded and extreme assumptions disguised as counter points. There's no way you could logically get from, "well, let them die" to "I take pleasure In watching poor people die" otherwise.

Headphones: the ultimate "don't talk to me, I'm working" sign.

This is really helpful. Thanks for the advice. It'd be great to keep in touch, and perhaps even meet up at some point. There's no sense in us making mistakes that have already been made!

"Here's a movie studio that actually innovated: Pixar."

If we're not competing with Pixar, and we're not competing with Fohr, then what are you doing implying that they were successful where we failed? You made the association, not me.

As we all know, Hacker News is a community based around the idea that comments should be either positive, or at least constructive. Since your comment is neither of those things, my first instinct was to scold, however, I decided first to do a little research.

Your stack overflow profile led me to discover what was once called Fohr, which seems to be a company you founded with the hopes of becoming "the next Pixar." Considering you also mentioned Pixar in your comment above, I'm sensing something of an obsession. But regardless, I've decided not to harass you for your bad-taste comment, because I assume it's due mostly to you feeling bitter over the fact that Fohr was not successful, but some other company in the same space might be.

We have one project currently in talks for financing, and several that found us after completion and used us for distribution. We're hoping to continue the momentum!

A very good point, and something I hadn't really considered. Much appreciated!

You're right. Apologies...

Before I say anything, let me first mention that I'm not trying to defend my right to post comments like this. I shouldn't have said anything.

That said, if you're struggling to find differences between Obama's administration and Bush's, you're looking in the wrong places.

I assume when you mention "the right to assassinate American citizens," you're referring to the case of the Yemeni boy who was killed by the drone? If that's the case, trust me when I say I don't disagree with you here: it's a horrible thing. BUT, just because it's horrible doesn't mean it wasn't avoidable. The boy knew that his father was on the "kill list" as a known extremist. In choosing to go and visit him in Yemen anyway, he would have accepted the possibility that he would be put in harms way by association. It was an avoidable risk that he knowingly chose to take. I don't find that nearly as offensive as say, Guantanamo bay, which I might add was created by the Bush administration.

But international politics is a messy area, and I think it's safe to say that no matter who is president, horrible things are bound to happen as a result of global economic climate, and independent of who's in office. What REALLY offends me, though, are the things that happen here at home.

When I hear conservatives say things like "We don't need more trees! We need more jobs!" I'm immediately offended that someone so short-sighted could even consider running for office. When important officials are making claims about women's bodies rejecting fetuses that are the result of rape, and others are refusing to teach the theory of evolution, I'm offended. These ideas are not healthy: they're toxic. They hinder the advancement of society.

So frankly, if I had to pick one thing about the Obama Administration that I do "care to discuss," it's gotta be the fact that never have I ever heard him suggest any such toxic ideas. I can't say so much for the other team.

Very valid. I just wanted people to know that I'm not unaware of how inappropriate it is. The fact that I chose to post it anyway should stand as a testament to how incredibly offensive this man's ideas are to me.

I know this might be a borderline inappropriate comment for Hackernews, but sometimes I wonder whether having horrible, racially insensitive, biased, outdated ideas is the definition of being Republican.

I was literally talking to someone yesterday about how I couldn't believe a plugin like this didn't exist yet. Long overdue. Well done!

That's gotta be one of the most genius conspiracy theories I ever heard.

I don't think fairness was ever the subject at hand. Rather, it's the quality of the process that's up for debate. If you've been rejected for a job, regardless of whether or not your rejection was fair, the point is that you'd probably like to receive some sort of notification as such. Otherwise, how long do you sit around waiting to hear back before you give up and move on?

Honestly, the process isn't just cumbersome for the applier, it also causes trouble for other employers, because if you never receive a rejection letter from your first choice company, you're likely to move on to others, and if your first choice happens to get back to you with an offer after you've already contacted others, then you're wasting all the OTHER companies' time.

I wouldn't call it great design. I'd call it lack of bad design. I feel like asking which day you're referring to is an extremely obvious step in selecting a time. The fact that we're surprised by it is a testament to how terrible most productivity software is.

Agreed. Plus, I think he's way off base when he says that syntax highlighting is equivalent to emphasizing certain parts of speech in traditional prose. It's not. The prose equivalent of not including syntax highliting would be not including and paragraphs, capital letters, commas, apostrophes, periods, bold, italics, or underlines. You're left with something that contains the same information, but is harder to understand.

Also, it bugs me when people try to compare code and prose. Just because they're both typed as text using keys on a keyboard doesn't mean they're in any way related. Calling them analogous is like trying to compare building a house and buying a car. Yeah, they're both life investments, but that doesn't mean you use any of the same strategies between them. Money aside, they're unrelated.

Pretty sure that's what he was trying to fix when he said candidates should be awarded a lump sum of money and nothing more can be used. It levels the playing field.

It's not even just the Hackernews publication. It may have started here, but it spread to all kinds of other news outlets like Wired. Hell, I was even pissed off enough to tweet some shame at Amazon about it, and if I did that, lord knows how many other people did too. This was big news. I would have been surprised if they HADN'T done anything about it.

Although, them reversing the wipe purely to save their publish image is equally despicable in my opinion.

I'm going to have to pick the other side on this one. It's an unfortunate result of capitalism that being what some people call "unethical" usually rewards businesses with success. You'll struggle to find any major successful business that didn't get to the position they're in by doing some unethical (and not always in a balsy but harmless way as was done here) things to their competitors. Look at Newscorp, spying on people to get news. Or Apple using unethical manufacturers. Or Microsoft, stealing software. It happens every day, and when it gets to such a corporate level, it's often labeled corporate greed, but honestly it's not. All it is is intelligent business leaders realizing that it's better for their company to do something unethical and take the heat for it than to do nothing at all.

Just the other day I went to use the good old fashioned twitter API to find that it had been deprecated in favor of a new one that requires that I do everything differently in order to get the same results. Really irked me. I can empathize with this guy.

The best part about this is that now I know that the box-shadow property can take multiple arguments. The more you know...

Correct, but the idea is that you'd just throw away the account that goes down.

It's not just the vocals you're losing, you're losing everything in the center of the mix. Typically that means kick drums, deep basses and anything else lower than about 120Hz (these pieces are always mixed in mono), plus vocals, and a lot of times snare drums.