zlacker

[return to "The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News"]
1. mushuf+g51[view] [source] 2019-08-08 18:32:37
>>lordna+(OP)
I liked this article, though I think it missed the best part of Hacker News. To me, Hacker News can feel like walking through Dumbledore's office -- magical and mind-bending collections of incredible devices, ideas, and oddities.

Just yesterday someone posted a comment with links to UI design libraries that I've been subconsciously wishing for in my dreams (humaans, undraw.co), and I used it in a product demo. As a self-taught technologist, HN has exposed me to SICP, functional programming, and just yesterday someone posted a book about Data Structures and Algorithms that I started reading. Dang was quoted as describing HN as a "hall of mirrors" or "fractal tree."

The author's focus on the controversial political parts of HN seems to me like going to a music festival and commenting on the food trucks. Yes, it's part of the experience, but that's not why people go and not what makes it magical.

Communicating the beauty of unfamiliar technical topics to a lay reader is much harder than politics, but the New Yorker has done well at that elsewhere (I like the Sanjay and Jeff profile). Moderation is an interesting topic in its own right, though, especially in the age of the IRA and meme-warfare.

◧◩
2. segfau+tw1[view] [source] 2019-08-08 21:20:47
>>mushuf+g51
I like this article as well.

But I think while it legitimately criticizes parts of the Hacker News and Silicon Valley culture of missing humanism and ethics (it quoted "they’re people who are convinced that they are too special for rules, [...] Society [...] is a logic puzzle where you just have to find the right set of loopholes to win the game. [...] Silicon Valley has an ethics problem, and ‘Hacker’ ‘News’ is where it’s easiest to see."), it also ignored the fact that Hacker News is not only a Silicon Valley backyard (although often is, but the matter of fact is:), it does attack unethical practices in technology as well, sometimes contrarian.

For example, just now, I saw a submission called "Western Academia Helps Build China’s Automated Racism", one comment says,

* There are almost no ethical uses for facial recognition. It is a technology for criminals.

* Is that racist? This algorithm seems to be specifically built to detect non-ethnic Chinese faces to further discrimination.

Also, yesterday's submission of "Can ads on a page read my password?", the top comment harshly criticized targeted ads:

* I really wish awareness of this reached a wider audience, third party advertising is a terrible blight on the web that has been allowed to grow and fester - it supplies no value and compromises both browser security and our peace of mind - being bombarded by these things constantly is training most of us to ignore a lot more and focus on short focused bursts of information...

If the article can add just a single example, it could make the story be more balanced, without affecting the overall theme and tone of the article.

[go to top]