Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Interview with gwern

    (www.dwarkeshpatel.com)
    308 points synthmeat | 12 comments | | HN request time: 0.635s | source | bottom
    1. A_D_E_P_T ◴[] No.42134708[source]
    www.gwern.net

    Something I've noticed in spending time online is that there's a "core group" of a few dozen people who seem to turn up everywhere there are interesting discussions. Gwern (who also posts here) is probably at the top of that list.

    replies(8): >>42134865 #>>42135089 #>>42135233 #>>42135471 #>>42135512 #>>42137322 #>>42139587 #>>42139602 #
    2. scarmig ◴[] No.42134865[source]
    There have been multiple times where I read a comment somewhere; thought to myself, wow, this guy is brilliant, let me see who wrote it so I can see if there are other things they've written; and, lo and behold, gwern.
    replies(1): >>42134889 #
    3. A_D_E_P_T ◴[] No.42134889[source]
    Yeah. Nick Szabo used to show up a lot, too.
    4. satvikpendem ◴[] No.42135089[source]
    Analogous to the 1% Rule [0]:

    > In Internet culture, the 1% rule is a general rule of thumb pertaining to participation in an Internet community, stating that only 1% of the users of a website actively create new content, while the other 99% of the participants only lurk. Variants include the 1–9–90 rule (sometimes 90–9–1 principle or the 89:10:1 ratio),[1] which states that in a collaborative website such as a wiki, 90% of the participants of a community only consume content, 9% of the participants change or update content, and 1% of the participants add content.

    [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule

    replies(1): >>42135300 #
    5. sva_ ◴[] No.42135233[source]
    I wonder how much of that can be attributed to the limitations of the human mind as we evolved in relatively small groups/tribes and it might be difficult to see beyond that
    6. falcor84 ◴[] No.42135300[source]
    I don't know what the current HN usage stats are, but assume you would still need to explain about 3 additional orders of magnitude to get from 1% of HN down to "a few dozen".
    replies(1): >>42135324 #
    7. satvikpendem ◴[] No.42135324{3}[source]
    It doesn't necessarily literally mean 1%, it's just an informal rule emphasizing the power law nature of creators of content versus its consumers.
    8. keiferski ◴[] No.42135471[source]
    This also might just mean that you're interested in X thing, and the writing you find interesting is by people in the same subculture.
    9. xnorswap ◴[] No.42135512[source]
    A hundred years ago you could say the same about the Bloomsbury Group.

    I don't know what causes such intellectual cliques to form, perhaps it's a result of an intersection of raw intellectual power and social dynamics.

    10. joenot443 ◴[] No.42137322[source]
    It's ChrisMarshallNY for me. So frequently I'll come to a comment chain on Apple or Swift or NYC stuff with the intention to make a sweet point, only to find Chris has already said the same thing, though much more eloquently.

    He's been building software for 10 years longer than I've been alive, hopefully in a few decades I'll have gained the same breadth of technical perspective he's got.

    11. ◴[] No.42139587[source]
    12. selfhoster11 ◴[] No.42139602[source]
    A thread comment from TeMPOraL is always a nice surprise.