Smoke alarms, fingerprint readers - why the HN community gets it wrong - <AUTHOR> http://gwisrp.wordpress.com/2013/10/09/smoke-alarms-fingerprint-readers-and-liquid-meals-why-the-hacker-news-community-keeps-getting-it-wrong/ <comment><USER4> People who build stuff tend to think a lot about the flaws before they do anything. If you pitch them your wonderful, shiny, new idea you'll immediately see the gears inside their head spinning away trying to figure out how to break it, why it's a bad idea or, worst of all, who has done it better before.

This might be bad for your ego, but it can also be tremendously useful.

Why post anything to hackernews? Do you want a bunch of ego-validating fawning?

"WOW!!! That's the greatest idea ever!" "Brilliant!" "I could never come up with something so ingenious!" "This is going to sell like hot-cakes and you are going to be rich!"

These are all great comments to hear, but utterly useless. If you only receive opinions like these you might spend your precious blood, sweat, and money making something that nobody wants. Slightly more useful comments can let you zero in on why your idea is good, so that no matter what else doesn't make the final cut, the good stuff will.

"Good idea. I particularly like how it..."

The negative comments that make it sound like your idea is trash? Well, sometimes they're right and sometimes they're wrong. You'll probably find yourself wanting to grab the authors of these comments by their short-hairs so you can shout into their face why they're wrong. If you can't think of anything past the physical violence, they just might have a point.

Some things that pop up here spark less than useful conversations as a side- effect of how HN people approach things. Take Apple's new fingerprint scanners. They are being sold as highly secure when all they really are is highly convenient. This hits that "easy to break" nerve builders have and is then reinforced by the contrarian urge to bash the big guy. It might be annoying to read if you're an Apple fan, but it's a natural result of the kind of thinking that goes on in HN. It might even be useful if you're considering using biometrics of some sort yourself!

In short, HN gets it right more often than not. People should keep bashing brilliant and stupid ideas alike because that's how everybody learns. If your ego gets hurt, take a break.

<comment><USER5> I find there's a corollary in going for user reviews of (whatever). The positive reviews are rarely helpful, but skimming the negative reviews is usually pretty informative. If the negs are mostly trollish trash, it's likely to be decent. But if the negs are showing a common thread of criticism, it can highlight issues that aren't showing up elsewhere.

Of course all user reviews need to be appropriately grain-of-salted, but the negs are far more informative to me than the pros.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> " _The Conservative view of Protect (inherent ideology: fire prevention should be as easy and user-friendly as possible) can be characterised (or caricatured), I think, roughly as follows: [present fire alarms are good enough, nobody needs these fancy doo-dads]_ "

Conservative ("Null") view: the primary objective of a smoke alarm is to (a) detect and (b) signal the presence of smoke. Nothing, hand waving or not, should compromise this.

Progressive ("Alternate") view: a smoke alarm must also maximise (c) the probability of the signal being heard. This objective is compromised if people, finding their smoke alarms a nuisance, turn them off.

In summary, Null says (a) and (b). Alternate says also (c). Null says adding (c) dilutes (b) and so is harmful. These views _not_ mutually exclusive - <USER2> everyone need have the same smoke alarm. The more disciplined may be safer with a traditional smoke alarm. Those of us who just spent a minute searching the ceiling may be better served by the Nest Protect.

" _Why not think about it this way: companies like Nest, Apple and Soylent are offering us, no strings attached, brand new propositions for paths to a better future._ "

Being sceptical of a fire safety product being brought to market is a good response. While I, too, found the tone of the Nest Protect and TouchID conversations combative, I was thoroughly informed by both. Constructive does not have to mean positive.

 _Disclosure: I am in the Alternate /"Progressive" camp_

<comment><USER7> Interestingly enough, the best solutions come from both parts working together. In this example, the conservative view is indeed correct, it is very, very dangerous if you could disable a true alert. However, the progressive view still has a darn realistic point.

But, once you combine both, you reach a really interesting third way: Don't do binary detection, do trinary detection if possible. "No smoke", "Some smoke" and "Ok this is completely fubar"-levels of smoke. "Some smoke" can be waved, Fubar-Levels of smoke cannot be waved and the user is informed of this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Mouhaha. Comparing Nest's HN reaction with the reaction on Soylent is just bad writing and reasoning.

> In every case, we're given a choice: do we react reflexively, hunting for > anything and everything that we can think of to shoot down a new and > challenging idea, or do we fight our first reflex, and give the idea a > chance?

Yeah, we should be giving a chance to use our brain and reason instead of being fooled but a nice product presentation and a beautiful "NEW!" sticker on it. As for Soylent, this product is an insult to reason and any kind of nutrition studies done before, so let's not put it as the same level as Nest. It's a different story altogether.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, I'm not an expert on nutrition. Soylent is just an idea I found very compelling.

<comment><USER8> It's not because an idea is compelling that it makes sense. Some people find suicide a very good solution to end up their everyday life problems, it does not validate it a good solution for everyone else.

The "give everyday idea a chance" is a lot like "respect everyone's opinion" crap we have to deal with so much nowadays. On the contrary, I'd rather have a fruitful discussion based on reason, data and reasonable assumptions with someone instead of accepting everything just because it's fresh and new and cool.

I think it's very healthy to challenge new ideas and to point out their flaws. That's why I enjoy the discussions on HN, most of the time, because you have a bunch of educated people here who usually are very reasonable when it comes to debating and produce interesting arguments to think about. This should be actually good feedback for people who produce new ideas, rather than a crowd saying "bravo" everytime something "original" comes out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > Every time we have this choice, and every time the conversation is dominated > by a fight between Conservatives and Progressives, it's a shame, because > fundamentally, both sides agree on the same things. Nobody thinks it's > awesome when houses burn down. Nobody thinks it would be better if computer > security on the whole got worse. Nobody thinks correct nutrition should be > harder. Nobody, if you get down to it, thinks anything should be harder to > use, that life should be less pleasant.

Blanket statements, out of context. Perfect writing again.

I can make blanket statements the same way too. We all want to be loved. We all want to be healthy. We all want to be rich. We all like things to be easy. So, fundamentally, we agree on the same things, right ?

WRONG!

> Nobody, if you get down to it, thinks anything should be harder to use, that > life should be less pleasant.

There is pleasure in doing HARD things. There is pleasure in learning from scratch and mastering something difficult. There is pleasure in exploration and understanding instead of digesting something pre-made for you.

Not for everyone, maybe, but in the hacker crowd you will find lots of people who are precisely like that.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm sorry that you found my writing so objectionable.

I wasn't, for the record, advocate that life should be easy in the sense that you seem to be thinking I mean it. Maybe we should distinguish between hard as in unnecessarily complicated and poorly designed, and hard as in challenging. I'm teaching myself how computers work at the moment, I really enjoy it. That's challenging, and I like challenging things. Current smoke alarm design, on the other hand, is not challenging in an enjoyable way. They're poorly designed and annoying, and that's a type of hard that I think anyone really likes.

<comment><USER8> > I'm teaching myself how computers work at the moment, I really enjoy it. > That's challenging, and I like challenging things. Current smoke alarm > design, on the other hand, is not challenging in an enjoyable way. They're > poorly designed and annoying, and that's a type of hard that I think anyone > really likes.

That's a type of hard most people don't care about because anyway it's not something they have to worry about every single day of their lives. That's a "LOW INVOLVEMENT" kind of problem. Unless you spend all your living time working on smoke alarms you will rarely have to deal with the inconveniences of their design. There are tons of things like that in life that nobody is bothered enough to fix because it's not really worth the time or the additional investment to fix it. Get over it. I'm pretty sure that even if Nest is a great solution (which it seems to be), it will not appeal to many people unless they price their product at the same range as the usual smoke detectors. If you have to pay twice more or so, it's not disruptive, it's just a premium product only premium-focused people will want to buy. The rest of us will keep living with their crappy smoke detectors and still have a good life nonetheless.

I guess you see my point now ?

<comment><AUTHOR> No, I don't see your point at all. You don't seem to have any point - <USER3> anger and empty cynicism. In fact, to me you seem to embody everything bad that I was trying to describe in my original post, so thanks for providing an excellent illustration of one of the worst styles of Hackernews participation.

I'm sorry, but I don't agree with you at all that smoke alarms are irrelevant or not relevant enough or whatever it is you seem to be trying to say here. I don't spend my life working on them but I've installed them for student tenants, thinking I was doing a great thing and maybe preventing them from killing themselves with an unattended cooking fire, and you know what, two months later when I went around every single one, every single flat I manage, had knocked their alarms down. Every single one. I wanted to slap the stupid fucks, but then I realised that hey, most people really are kinda lazy and stupid and you will get nowhere getting angry over that fact, you have to accept that and adapt as best you can.

At the time I imagined something very similar to Nest - an alarm over your oven which turns it off if it detects sudden heat. An alarm which sends me, the property manager, a text if it goes off. An alarm that can distinguish too between "a little smoke" and "a shitload of smoke and heat." I imagined that, and I talked to the local fire service, and they laughed and shrugged and said it'd be great but who's gunna do that.

And now guess what, here's a company that's actually made and prepping to sell something even better than what I thought about. It's a beautiful looking object, for starters. It talks to you in intelligent language - "there's carbon monoxide in the living room". It distinguishes between potentially dangerous and critically dangerous situations. It can send push notifications to your phone when something goes wrong or when batteries are about to go out. It can be silenced with an elegant hand gesture. And it gets better: it lights up a room when it sees you walking through it at night. It can turn off your furnace if CO levels rise, if its connected to Nest's Thermostat. And it will help your Thermostat get smarter about power usage by detecting your activity.

And this is just a version one product. Keep in mind - the name is "Protect", not "Smoke Detector." What's to stop them making v2 smarter, and maybe it can sense when people in a house become panicked and call emergency services? Maybe it detects unusual activity when burglars enter? Whatever - use your imagination - the possibilities are huge. And don't forget, this is only the second product that Nest has produced. And already with two they've made them better together. This is the Internet of Things man. It's happening, and it's going to be massive.

If you're not seeing the breakthrough yet, then I just don't know what to say to you. What, are you angry because they made such a good product? Because they're selling it for a fraction of what it's worth? Because they're smarter than any of the unimaginative companies making crappy smoke alarms we had to put up with up until today? Are you angry because it's "not enough"? Because the whole world's not going to run out and buy this one product tomorrow, and so therefore for some weird reasons we shouldn't bothered being excited about it, because obviously it's gunna go nowhere?

Get over yourself man. The world is about to explode with companies like Nest - and new products and opportunities will emerge to improve every single facet of our life. And people like you are going to look like the worst kind of assholes when the transformation becomes obvious. If the false binary choice you seem to offer is between a chorus of blind praise and your brand of negative bullshit, thanks but no thanks, I'd rather take the former.

<comment><USER8> Hahah. You are the one full of anger because someone has a different opinion than you, it seems. Look, I don't know how to spell it to you if you don't know how to read my post. I mentioned "LOW INVOLVEMENT" in big letters so that I'd hope you would read it, but it seems like I wasted my time.

> I've installed them for student tenants, thinking I was doing a great thing > and maybe preventing them from killing themselves with an unattended cooking > fire, and you know what, two months later when I went around every single > one, every single flat I manage, had knocked their alarms down

This sentence proved that you are not a regular person who uses only a single or two smoke detectors for their home. So you are not relevant. Almost nobody is like you. I have two smoke detectors and they only triggered once in 7 years living in the same place, and I had no issue whatsoever to stop them. This is probably in line with most people who have LOW INVOLVEMENT with these kind of things. You know, when you only use something like once a year or less?

> The world is about to explode with companies like Nest - and new products > and opportunities will emerge to improve every single facet of our life.

If you think everyone is going to buy the best of the best in every category of prodcuts and spend all of their cash on things they don't really care about, you are in for a big surprise.

> What, are you angry because they made such a good product?

I'm not angry, I was merely explaining my point of view and I have no idea why you take my view as one of an angry person or something. I found their video nice, they did a good job, I'm just saying it won't change the fact that most people will not care and will not even know about it and keep going on with their business as usual.

> And people like you are going to look like the worst kind of assholes when > the transformation becomes obvious.

Actually you are going to look like the worst kind of asshole for calling me names while I have never attacked you personally. That's ad hominem at best and frankly this is not surprising for someone who makes blanket statements about everything.

Cheers.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm sorry if I lost my temper, I've tried to understand your position here and respond calmly and reasonably to you but clearly I've failed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Brudgers comment is at top because community thought it was worthy. Brudgers comment garnered 120 posts, meaning it sparked interest and posters contributed to that discussion. This is the underlying message of HN. Discussing.

"But why not focus on the underlying idea – if we could make eating and nutrition easier, how? If we could make phones more customisable and modular, how? Where could this lead? The possibilities, once you start thinking along these lines, are endless."

To me, that brudgers discussion does directly and tangentially hint at making things better and benefits of existing solutions. And moreover, some people are good at fine combing ideas and not propose some new. Criticising people because they are being "negative" amounts to living in a bubble.

Btw ironic, considering OP's comments on this article: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6464120](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6464120)

<comment><USER10> _Brudgers comment is at top because community thought it was worthy. Brudgers comment garnered 120 posts, meaning it sparked interest and posters contributed to that discussion. This is the underlying message of HN. Discussing._

What you say here is true. But it also lacks context - Hacker News is not intended to be a pure democracy. Combative discussion fostered by an incendiary comment shouldn't be acceptable just because it features factually accurate content upvoted en masse by the community.

If that were the case, Hacker News would not have guidelines or moderators. You could allow Hacker News to operate like a pure free-market economy, excusing this as long as it's democratically supported - but that is detrimental to the community's purpose in the long term. Online communities require involved government because the participants (demonstrably) cannot govern themselves when in a group. At worst, discussion devolves to chaos; at best, it becomes inefficient and bothersome. Like anything else, there are pros and cons to combative discussion, and the negatives outweigh the positives.

Examples like the Touch ID discussion and the Nest alarm discussion are particularly informative in this regard, because combative, rehashed meta- discussion took up an _entire page_ in each instance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11>
      it ought to be remembered that there is nothing
      more difficult to take in hand, more perilous
      to conduct, or more uncertain in its success,
      than to take the lead in the introduction of a
      new order of things. Because the innovator has
      for enemies all those who have done well under
      the old conditions and lukewarm defenders in
      those who may do well under the new.
      (Machiavelli, The Prince, Chapter VI)

</comment><comment><USER12> For me, the problem with many of these new "world improving" products is that the founders/creators are often very young and inexperienced in their fields and frankly a bit naive.

This applies more to things like Soylent which i find is dangerous in the way its marketed now as opposed to the experiment it was in the beginning but its also true for Nest.

There are companies in this business producing smoke alarms for decades and they most certainly know more about its challenges than the NEST guys and given the fact that their thermostats are by no means flawless, one should atleast be cautious and not drink the whole can of marketing induced and VC funded cool-aid without thinking. This is not a touch enabled music player after all.

Being naive and fresh in a decade old market is usually great, but there are certain areas, for example those that can affect peoples health in negative ways, where experience is simply invaluable.

</comment><comment><USER13> Feels like there's a fine line between having a negative attitude about a new product and exposing real weaknesses - whether those are weaknesses in the product itself, or the market within which it falls. Probably nothing wrong with exposing weaknesses, as long as its done in the context of "here's what's wrong, and my idea of how it could be fixed or improved."

I agree with your assessment though, the Nest post this morning really was quite 'over the top' so to say, as far as negativity goes.

</comment><comment><USER14> I'm in the same boat as you.

This is exactly what was going through my mind as I traversed what could be aptly described as a flamewar over the product announcement of the Next Protect alarm this morning and after being unable to find any under all of the people claiming to be experts are cooking without setting off their alarm and teaching people how to use existing alarms instead of talking about the device that the comments were supposed to be about.

I'm not saying these comments were off-topic, but they were very distracting to me.

<comment><USER15> Yeah i didn't expect a Flame War on HN. I have seen angry mobs (JustFab incident) and very whole hearted debates but they usually have some really nice points on both sides. This incident... well it was wrong. BUT that does not in any way mean that HN is wrong as a community to criticize products etc. That's called "peer review". And it's usually very productive on HN because the people here are really good at distilling through you pitches and analyzing what's good and what's bad about a product.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I think a lot of the negativity and naysaying might also be spawned by jealousy of the attention the product is getting. You can critique and point out flaws without being negative.

</comment><comment><USER17> I think large sections of the community think emotively and large sections thing logically.

Emotive thinking I think goes without saying is worse since it's not logical.

But emotive people can still be quite good at their specialities and if the topic is not pushed by emotions.

No idea on the solution, have a Vulcan filter on emotive threads?

Is HN about learning from other people or about other people or both?

[edit] And will say emotive people also have other great skill sets like motivating others. Just are not good when you what to find the right decision.

</comment><comment><USER18> This might be one oy the best articles posted here.

Doesn't matter the negativity it may receive, we all know you hit the nail on the head.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you, that's very kind of you :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> This post is lazy and probably dangerous and I know how to use a browser add- on to collapse comments and so should everyone else, so there's no need for this and no real problem beyond how incompetent people are, and if they can't read past the first negative comment it's their fault.

</comment><comment><USER20> I hope HN continues to treat great new ideas with muted ambivalence. Reading articles with >10 comments is a waste of time.</comment>


PokemonGo Bot – Path Generator – Follows Pedestrian Paths and Sidewalks - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/brandonhon/PokeBotWaypointGenerator <comment><USER2> Given the recent banwave, and niantic's statements about targeting bots, it feels like a bad time to try automating the game.

Besides - convincing me to get out of the office and take a few minutes to walk around outside is the sole reason I still have Pokemon go installed!

</comment><comment><USER3> Doesn't using bots get your account banned?

<comment><AUTHOR> Depends really. I setup and use my bot in a more human like fashion to make it harder to catch. If you use the default setup you will most likely get caught due to how the bot moves. Usually the bot defaults to walking in large circles.

By using a more human like path it's much harder to catch.</comment></comment>


How We Teach Introductory Computer Science Is Wrong - <AUTHOR> https://cacm.acm.org/blogs/blog-cacm/45725-how-we-teach-introductory-computer-science-is-wrong/fulltext <comment><AUTHOR> Key points:

" Not problem-solving leads to better problem-solving skills than those doing problem-solving" \- For beginners.

"putting introductory students in the position of discovering information for themselves is a bad idea"

"Intermediate students do learn better with real programming, real problem- solving. There is a place for minimally guided student activity, including programming. It's just not at the beginning."</comment>


North Korean Drones Ain't So Good - <AUTHOR> http://phys.org/news/2014-04-nkorean-drones-crude-threat.html

<comment><AUTHOR> It features a Cannon camera can be bought for about $950.</comment>


Re: UACMe – Defeating Windows User Account Control - <AUTHOR> http://www.kernelmode.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&p=25995#p25995

<comment><USER2> Is this as bad as it sounds?</comment>


Tesla shows ventilator prototype made from car components - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-06/tesla-shows-ventilator-prototype-made-from-car-components <comment><USER2> Can't you just take the blueprint of an existing ventilator, and begin mass production on it? No need to reinvent the science and engineering of it.

And since Trump enabled the emergency order, then I'm sure he can also waive the Intellectual Property violations as well for this.

Something like this, while novel, looks like a lost cause. Normally, this machine would probably take months or years to certify for its safety, and I'm sure it would need to be certified by the FDA for live human usage.

What if there's a defect, and the machine fails at a critical moment, and kills the patient? Then, who's fault or liability is that? Tesla? The hospital? The doctor? The FDA? Or does it all get brushed under the rug, and the patient is declared dead because of the virus, and not because of some defect in the machine.

For a price comparison, I saw that the ventilators that China had shipped to the world, had a listed price of $2,732. I'm not sure what the final MSRP markup is.

But at that price, it seems that ventilators are not really that expensive.

<comment><USER3> NIH is a huge issue at Tesla.

Tesla was supposed to be using Medtronic designs but it seems they've already given up on that idea.

Unfortunately, it does no good to reach mass production 18 months late.

<comment><USER4> If we are to avoid falling back into our dangerous old ways of not having enough spare capacity then we need to have more diversity and competition in supply, production, and marketing of medical equipment so that health authorities can more easily afford to have excess capacity during the good times in preparation for the bad. Of course sooner would be better but later is not necessarily futile.

And most likely Tesla will probably drop the project entirely as soon as the fuss dies down but that doesn't mean that someone else working on an unconventional approach should necessarily give up just because they won't be in time for this crisis, there will be more crises later.

<comment><USER3> I agree. My issue is with Tesla demand uncritical adulation for a PR project that is being designed without any input from actual users (like the cave submarine that was completely unusable for its stated purpose) on a timeframe that basically ignores the ongoing crisis.

We have sufficient manufacturers of ventilators to build up spare capacity _after_ the crisis is over. It is not praise worthy for Tesla to build a luxury ventilator that won't be ready until months or years after this crisis is over (assuming they actually take it to production).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> An exercise in false hope, futility, ostensible charity, and virtue-signaling. Ventilator manufacturers have solved numerous issues including reliability, durability, noise levels and loop hygiene (as well as possible). Automotive engineers don't know what they're doing compared to ventilator engineers. Maybe they should stay in their lane rather than squander attention, time and money on something that is inherently dangerous to public health.</comment>


Can Steve Huffman Save Reddit from Itself? - <AUTHOR> http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/10/reddit-founder-steve-huffman.html <comment><USER2> I think reddit has the potential to turn into something really worthwhile, if they let it. But my personal opinion is they need to let the current culture go, and think more about what they want this site to be in 5 years, 10 years, 50 years.

What is their vision for social communications for the short, mid, and long- term future? Is it superficial communications and small discussions around niche interests? Or is more like the discussion boards as they existed, for example, in Ender's game, where where leaders of the world have serious talks about policy, politics, and philosophy, and invoke real change?

I mention the Ender's game boards specifically because it seems so easy to start to transition reddit towards something like that. Make karma worth something. Have karma split into types for entertainment vs. insightful commentary, and earn your way onto "serious" boards. Let the current site just be the starting point, but build a new tier above it, of more serious talk. Build your way up into a multi-faceted communication tool that can be taken seriously by all levels of society, while still leaving the light-hearted, superficial nature of its current culture intact for those who want it.

I have no idea what the reddit leadership desires... I am sure there are 1000 other directions it can be taken. But they need to pick a direction and start going there. Because right now, the site is growing in numbers, but stagnating by all other metrics.

<comment><USER3> What we're missing is a serious change in mentality. Internet Points/Karma and a different UI won't change that. We already have all the technology for such discussions, but no one is interested. The closest thing to serious public political discussions is happening in the House and Senate floor debates, or whatever is equivalent in your country, and nobody watches that.

<comment><USER4> Ironically if you watch UK Prime Minister's Questions it consists primarily of point-scoring and jeering, with occasional excursions into triviality.

On occasion in Parliament you will find people delivering impassioned, carefully researched speeches .. to an empty room.

The prerequisite for discussion has to be willingness to listen and finding a commonality of view, both of which are in very short supply these days.

<comment><USER5> Much of that is due to incentives and not an inescapable aspect of public fora. Two notable examples that stand out in my mind of "people I probably disagree with about some things but trust highly" are HN's very own gwern, for exhaustive research, and Scott Alexander of Slate Star Codex. Somehow they have hacked, avoided, or self-disciplined their way into good-faith engagement without giving up ground to do so.

Integrated fact-checking would go a long way in political debates; gwern provides his own and S. Alexander, while less exhaustive, is relentless in analyzing his own biases and hewing to rhetorical charity. They would be less remarkable in a world where political debates had integrated fact-checking, as politicians would have to adapt.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I think the first mistake here would be to consider Reddit as a one entity. Reddit is a weird place where content grow out of distinct subreddits, and sometimes, that content end up on the front-page (which I bet is the most commonly visited on Reddit). The discussions and "We are the Reddit army" is often a big fat joke (or circlejerk as Reddit calls it). People get eachother riled up, and start to believe that they have "a right" to dictate anything and everything regarding to the site politics. Just watch the whole fat- shaming incident. People were acting like someone was put on death-row, while pretty much all the management of the site did was take down a few horrible sub-reddits that made a laughing stock of people with serious problems. People started arguing that "condoning fat people was wrong" as if that was ever an argument. I think Reddit is beyond management. Last night I read that they're working on a new algorithm for the front-page which is probably the closest you get to control the "community" at this point.

<comment><USER7> It says a lot about a chunk of the population that being a small, fairly obscure subreddit will generally result in Good Things, but becoming a default will quickly result in being overrun by racists, gay-haters, mysoginists, and suchlike.

Heaven help you if your small subreddit attracts the attention of KiA, redpill, or the like, unless you enjoy a constant stream of filth from rape apologists.

<comment><USER8> > It says a lot about a chunk of the population that being a small, fairly > obscure subreddit will generally result in Good Things, but becoming a > default will quickly result in being overrun by racists, gay-haters, > mysoginists, and suchlike.

The dynamic on Reddit has been the exact opposite, whereby subreddits that become popular are taken over by "SJWs", for want of a better description.

Can you name a single popular subreddit that's been overrun by gay-hate and misogyny through becoming a default?

<comment><USER9> To sane people, "social justice warrior" translates as "not awful, has respect, a humane human being".

<comment><USER10> I agree with you. However some people use social justice as an excuse to be awful to others. Combine that with the fact(?) that loud minorities are often generalized to be representative of the whole (especially when that minority confirms prejudices about the whole), and "social justice warrior" takes on a negative meaning.

<comment><USER11> > However some people use social justice as an excuse to be awful to others.

And to the degree they do that, they're not fighting for social justice.

> loud minorities are often generalized to be representative of the whole

Though often obsessedly so by people who don't seem to give much of a crap either way, anyway, and gloss over their own mute accompliceship in rather serious evils by pointing out things that are kind of peanuts in comparison. You know, when instead of criticizing people for hurting their own cause, or merely paying lip service to a cause that is actually worthy, unlike the petty games they use it for, they just go "Hah! See? that's what those SJW types are like".

I don't see any serious people of high caliber using that abbreviation, that's for sure. And it's not like people criticize "tumblr-SJW" generally have their own serious websites or at least posts screaming bloody murder: for me someone without a solution getting mad and overshooting the goal is still preferable to someone completely numb, motionless, and maybe even gloating and proud of that. I know it's not a dichotomy, that there are many alternatives preferable to both, but in the given situation of that one group criticizing that other group, I know where my sympathies lie.

> _There 's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes > you so sick at heart, that you can't take part! You can't even passively > take part! And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the > wheels…upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it > stop! And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who > own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working > at all!_

\-- Mario Savo ( [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhFvZRT7Ds0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhFvZRT7Ds0) )

^ To me that's not pathos, that's the baseline, and we all fall short of it, which doesn't move it one inch. If some kiddos on the interwebs discover a slice of that and do their own stuff, _good for them_. Godspeed to them. And in so far they make asses of themselves, I hope they learn to pick themselves up and fail better in the future, but I can't say they are doing anything so horribly wrong their parents did or their peers are doing so much better.

As Assata Shakur said, only the strong go crazy, the weak just go along; and that's why they build bubbles and communities in which they can have the appearance of being strong, and hide behind each other and their memes. That there is a grain of truth to some of them, that people indeed do use serious issues to get attention or money, doesn't really change that, it just means even a broken clock is right twice a day.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> >the list of an individual user's idiosyncratic sub-Reddit subscriptions is nothing if not a precise psychographic profile of his interests.

Not to mention voting habits, which specify a user's tastes much more finely. The value of that information is potentially astronomical. More honest and finely grained info than facebook likes could be, for instance, similarly for ad tracking. Also reaches some hard to target demos.

<comment><USER3> Speaking of voting. I cannot find any _terms of service_ for hacker news when you create an account. Can our information legally sold to advertisers?

<comment><USER13> IANAL, but I'd say they can't sell the comments - they're copyrighted, and since they don't ask for an explicit license, the implied one is probably limited to displaying them on the site - but they could sell the votes/flags/karma information.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Not sure: he continued Ellen Pao's job in destroying the massive goodwill they had, and being a founder he was immune to calls to step down and effectively made the changes permanent.

Reddit used to be loved and trusted as a place that cared about its community and free speech, but now most users probably stay on Reddit only because it's popular, and would jump ship as soon as a more popular alternative, even in just a niche, shows up.

But of course, thanks to funding, possible good management and inertia, Reddit might just be able to out-innovate and out-compete anyone else and keep its current position.

<comment><USER7> > cared about its community and free speech

I'm sure we're all weeping over the demise of /r/coontown and other Stormfront-affiliated subreddits. What a sad loss, and what a valuable group of users to alienate!

<comment><USER15> If you want to say something, say it. Don't say the opposite in a sarcastic tone.

<comment><USER4> So you're in favour of all forms of free speech except _sarcasm_?

Edit: ok, evidently jokes aren't a popular mode of speech either.

<comment><USER16> This isn't about surpressing free speech. It's about basic communication and debate.

<comment><USER17> Sarcasm used to be a effective and totally valid way to make a point, -I mean it was even part of basic reading/writing education when I grew up 20 years ago.

Of course you can easily overdo it but I think banning sarcasm has a significant downside and we should rather teach people to use it correctly.

<comment><USER16> Once again, this isn't about banning anything. This is about productive conversation. A value which makes HN unique out of all the internet communities.

What the commenter was doing was insinuating a conclusion based upon a straw man, so as not to be scrutinised for the underlying conclusion.

<comment><USER17> Didn't downvote (ok, even gave you an upvote while commenting) but I think you misinterpreted the situation I/we reacted to.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Reddits problem is not the small communities people barely know that they exist until someone points them out. It is the shift in attitude in the bigger communities. I can spend hours finding specific examples but the gist of it is becoming more US-centric and "nerd dismissing" place by the day.

</comment><comment><USER19> When we applied to YC, Steve was nice enough to meet with us at Hipmunk, and as with what he did there, I think he's going to do a great job at Reddit, where I've become an increasingly invested participant, once I learned how to dig deeper into the subreddits, such as /r/oakland or /r/vandwellers etc. I think, based upon my experience on the site, compared to those on fb and elsewhere, that Reddit continues to have incredible growth opportunities, because there are hundreds, nay thousands, of subreddits that we can't even imagine, people will create, once people discover their power, like /r/camelracing or /r/swatvalley, or who knows what. 10 years from now, I think Reddit will be (one of) the biggest site on the whole of the internet. And if not Reddit, than its many copy cats. I just wish there was some way that I could help, aside from what little moderating I do.

<comment><USER20> /r/vandwellers represent! :D

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Reddit has just grown too big and important. Neither the links nor the discussions feel genuine anymore. I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way. I wonder what will replace it.

And of course I'm talking about the popular subreddits mostly concerning news and politics. Subreddits about classical music and such, still work fine. However any political subreddit seems compromised in some form or another.

</comment><comment><USER22> Does reddit have funding issues currently? I ask because subjectively I've started getting more and more "too busy" HTTP 503's while browsing, which hints at a lack of capacity but surely that could be scaled out fairly easily if financies permit?

</comment><comment><USER23> People seem to like lots of new content, and feeling like they have small, personal places to share content and have conversations with each other.

If Huffamn et.al. can further refine that feeling of Reddit being a small community and also a massive community at the same time, I see no reason for the platform to not continue being a dominant player in the social space.

</comment><comment><USER19> Terrible reporting. I dug into those unsavory subreddits, and a huge number of them were mostly inactive, with hardly a posting for the last couple of years, and otherwise, like the fashion police one, they are hardly like what was described.

I'm tired of this 'look how bad reddit is' reporting. It's boring and inaccurate.

</comment><comment><USER24> How do we save Reddit from the people who aggressively try to change it?

</comment><comment><USER25> Been using Reddit since before the "Digg Exodus" phase; The recent changes on reddit really doesn't look promising, with the front page suddenly feeling sluggish and other issues popping up... but I hope the Betteridge's law doesn't apply here - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines)</comment>


New AI can create movies from just a few snippets of text - <AUTHOR> http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/02/new-algorithm-can-create-movies-just-few-snippets-text <comment><USER2> "Currently, the videos are only 32 frames long—lasting about 1 second—and the size of a U.S. postage stamp, 64 by 64 pixels." Too bad they don't show any examples.</comment>


Ask HN: Automated Drone Photography - <AUTHOR> Is there a way to have a drone go around a building and take 48 photos at equal intervals to give a 360 view around the building? We are looking to add it to our platfrom Glo3D.net <comment><USER2> Would you be able to have a drone fly autopilot around the building, taking a 4k video of the flight - then extract still images from the video at the intervals you desire? (Every 7.5 degrees it seems)

Otherwise, have a sensor or beacon placed in the center of the building which transmits as an anchor point to the drone to fly around, which with custom software could trigger a camera to take a photo every 7.5 degrees in-flight.

Just spit-balling ideas, and have no idea if this tech already exists.

</comment><comment><USER3> I know someone who made [https://ambergarage.com/#](https://ambergarage.com/#)

(you need to click the upper right corner for the link skywand)

</comment><comment><USER4> Is there a reason you don't want to use an HD video recorded for the duration of the flight on a programmed path and extract the frames you need from that?

</comment><comment><USER5> Yes. You can use KittyHawk software or DJI and set up a flight path.</comment>


All-Girls Teen Engineering Team Creates a Solar-Powered Tent for Homeless People - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/06/22/533909715/all-girls-teen-engineering-team-create-a-solar-powered-tent-for-homeless-people <comment><USER2> There are so many unnecessary quantifiers in this title.

<comment><USER3> Engineering team creates solar powered tent. Wouldn't even get one like or retweet.

How's this:

10 blind and paralyzed transgendered teens sell lemonaid in attempt to fund Engineering project they've created to design a solar powered tent for homeless veterans.

<comment><USER4> There is also such a thing as a representative summary of what the article is going to be about. It's about how DIYGirls worked with a group of high schoolers, part of an all girls club, to make a solar powered tent.

And it's an NPR article, at that.

Not everything requires the cached thought: "mo' views mo' $s"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Love to know how far they would have got without all the assistance.

</comment><comment><USER6> There is almost certainly more UV in the original sunlight than there is coming out of their solar powered UV light...

<comment><USER7> Sure, but it's a lot easier to switch on a light than to turn your tent inside out.</comment></comment>