←back to thread

PG: The biggest source of stress for me at YC was running HN

(twitter.com)
482 points ilamont | 1 comments | 11 Jul 20 21:53 UTC | HN request time: 0.278s | source
Show context
_bxg1 ◴[11 Jul 20 23:14 UTC] No.23807033[source]▶
I honestly think the only solution is for individuals to recuse themselves from those networks (I say on one of those networks), lower the trust they place in digital information, etc. It's become clear that the downward spiral is intrinsic to the medium itself (or possibly just the scale). I don't believe that any amount of technology, or product-rethinking, or UX will change that. We just weren't meant to interact this way. My only hope is that people eventually get disenchanted or burned-out enough that they simply stop engaging.

I replied to the original tweet too ("what would you do if you were Jack Dorsey?"). I said I'd shut the whole thing down.

replies(3): >>23807161 #>>23813894 #>>23815451 #
asah ◴[11 Jul 20 23:33 UTC] No.23807161[source]▶
Sadly, the level headed people recuse themselves which only adds to the toxicity.
replies(1): >>23807309 #
newacct583 ◴[11 Jul 20 23:58 UTC] No.23807309[source]▶
Actually what happens is the level headed people on one side of an issue divide recuse themselves, leaving a "seemingly level-headed consensus echo chamber" behind. IMHO, that's worse. This account exists largely to counter exactly that trend. It's important (to me) that newcomers to the site don't get the idea that "hackers" are all fringe libertarians on every non-technical subject.
replies(3): >>23807375 #>>23808300 #>>23810001 #
dang ◴[12 Jul 20 00:07 UTC] No.23807375[source]▶
This site may feel like a "consensus echo chamber" but in reality it is nothing remotely close to that. I think you may be running into the notice-dislike bias: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que.... Since you report noticing fringe libertarians, we can be sure that you dislike fringe libertarianism. We can also be sure that they have just the opposite picture of HN, since everyone crafts their picture in the image of what they dislike, without realizing that they're doing that. It just feels like an objective picture. I can list dozens of examples of this, but I'll restrain myself for once and spare you.

Unfortunately, these extremely contradictory subjective images of HN seem to be a consequence of its structure, being non-siloed: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que.... This creates a paradox where precisely because the site is less divisive it feels more divisive—in the sense that it feels to people like it is dominated by their enemies, whoever their enemies may be. That's extremely bad for community, and I don't know what to do about it, other than post a version of this comment every time it comes up.

Thanks for caring about level-headeness, in any case.

replies(5): >>23807422 #>>23807590 #>>23808045 #>>23808650 #>>23809548 #
lefstathiou ◴[12 Jul 20 00:42 UTC] No.23807590[source]▶
Dang, I respectfully disagree.

Just the other day I noticed HN take a heavy hand on removing an article that hit the homepage about a virologist publishing a paper that suggested the only logical explanation for COVID is that it’s manufactured.

There are absolutely topics and perspectives that are not welcomed on HN, as the lead moderator it would be unwise in my opinion to think otherwise (given your biases would be the most threatening to an open forum) and you naturally would have a tough time identifying the absence of a perspective you don’t share.

As an example, I would challenge you to pick five articles that discuss unions that hit the homepage on HN and see what % of threads (and how much of the up vote they accounted for) were inherently anti union. I would also be sure to give only partial credit for threads that added boiler plate sentences saying something along the lines of “while I believe in the value of XYZ” because that’s basically a requirement to take any contrarian (to liberal / Silicon Valley ideology) or conservative view on this site. I can give you a laundry list of topics that will show this trend.

From my (biased) perspective (and from someone outside of the valley reading this site religiously for 13 years) HN is increasingly hostile to certain perspectives (and I’m not talking about social issues here). I don’t care much about it - I just opt out - which is the point.

Why not run a poll about it?

replies(3): >>23807603 #>>23807798 #>>23813620 #
Ghjklov ◴[12 Jul 20 00:44 UTC] No.23807603[source]▶
What was the article? Now I'm curious
replies(2): >>23807696 #>>23807723 #
gus_massa ◴[12 Jul 20 01:06 UTC] No.23807723[source]▶
Probably "The most logical explanation is that Covid-19 comes from a laboratory" https://www.minervanett.no/corona/the-most-logical-explanati...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23725966 (flagged, 18 points, 8 days ago, 4 comments)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23727763 (10 points, 8 days ago, 3 comments)

[Personal opinion: The evidence is not enough to prove that is was created/improved/selected in a lab. It has a few "lucky" features, but normal coronavirus don't cause pandemics, so we already know it is a "lucky" case.]

18 points by haltingproblem 8 days ago | flag | hide | past | favorite | 4 comments

"

replies(3): >>23808271 #>>23808314 #>>23811384 #
1. rurban ◴[12 Jul 20 14:09 UTC] No.23811384[source]▶
I would not dismiss his arguments at first sight. but they are presented as anecdotes, not as convincing proof. his gut instinct might be right, because he is experienced, but there should be a proof. And genomics proofs are actually easy nowadays. everybody is familiar with neural networks and how long it needs to come up with optimized mutations. I just miss the mathematical proof of the low likelihood of natural mutations in x generations to come up with that special spike. Note that the period of 10-14 days per generation is extremely fast. Like with the drosphila. extraordinary claims need better proofs.