pvg

You can always hit the 'threads' link in the navbar. Internet forums evolved without this glaring gap in basic functionality and some somehow continue to eke out an existence without it.

There are piles of such projects on HN regularly. There was a recent mini-parade of Show HN hobby OS's of all stripes.

they just sit and watch tiktok etc.

The no-longer-young griping about whatever it is the youths are up to remains a permanent interest, at least.

Ongoing thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44396518

Once an HN post gets a substantial discussion, immediate followups generally count as dupes - after all, these topics just had a big discussion. This is mentioned in the FAQ - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html (search for 'reposts')

60 * 7 is not all that great either if you get cascading and clumping as people type at the same time- coalescing the outbound updates still seems like a good idea and since the game is turn based you know it's not really going to affect gameplay. You've basically made yourself a first person shooter networking problem for a game that's slower than WoW. That feels like overkill in terms of self-imposed obstacles.

Thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44389202

It sounds like you want to coalesce the outbound updates otherwise everyone typing is accidentally quadratic.

You could write this up as a Show HN and it will show up in more places on HN where people can see it - https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html

Discussion of the paper https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44135369

Nobody is telling you how and how strongly to feel - just not to be a yelly asshole about it.

This is a valid show hn - if you can’t comment on it reasonably just don’t comment or find a thread where the general surveillance topic is actually the topic.

It’s someone’s show hn for something that’s NYC law, designed to address a specific local problem. Calling this ‘evil’ is, at a minimum, unserious bombast which the site rules ask you to avoid, especially when discussing someone else’s work. You can critique the work without the Savonarola act. It also happens to be more effective that way so it’s in your own interest.

You regularly spam a generic generative ai ‘art’ thing on this site so of all people it feels like you’d have a broader, less kneejerky and more charitable view of what use of the technology is ‘dystopian’

The provenance is there for everyone to see so the purpose of the comment, beside some sort of implied aspersion is unclear.

We absolutely do that all the time?

There's nothing wrong with any of that, for an HN submission. The paper itself could be bad but that's what the discussion thread is for - discussing the thing presented rather than its meta attributes.

Ongoing megathread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44341639

Related knifery thread a few months ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42463295

You probably want to repost this when you have the video mentioned in your readme ready or are a bit further along in your physical build.

Non-blogspam original https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44340904

Ongoing https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44341639

A discussion of a major world event makes a lot more sense than a discussion of something tangentially related to a major world event. People sensibly flag the tangential stuff as effective dupes - it wouldn't really make sense to have a front page discussion about the event as well as a front page discussion about a plane.

Recently https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42891200