OH NOOOOOOOOO
(I write insightful comments so that I may also write cathartic ones like this. Vote however you like.)
Edit: This comment was ill-conceived in every way possible.
OH NOOOOOOOOO
(I write insightful comments so that I may also write cathartic ones like this. Vote however you like.)
Edit: This comment was ill-conceived in every way possible.
EDIT: Apparently implying a parent comment is pandering for karma is an equally rapid way to get it downvoted. Please don't downvote the parent comment because of this one- I actually found it quite witty.
I do regret adding that to the end. I really didn't mean to influence the votes. Now, of course, I can't remove it without eliminating the context for our discussion.
Edit for more meta: Apparently I am now That Guy In The Thread Whose Comments Are All Downvoted Regardless of Contribution to the Discussion. I am also That Guy Who Left A Stupid Reddit-Style Comment, That Guy Who Is Spending To Much Time in the Thread, and That Guy Who Thinks Hacker News is Going Downhill. Time for a sandwich.
I'm just incredibly interested in crowd psychology and mass control, and pointing this out as an effective tactic.
The Internet: You aren't interacting with people. You're interacting with a model of the average personality on sites you frequent. People end up falling into manipulation bundles. "If I do X, bucket P will do Z. If I do K, bucket M will do A, ..."
Want to try it out? "DHH sucks!" -> bucket A: "Yeah, he kinda does." bucket B: "NO! He's our HERO!" bucket C: "Well, he's good at what he does, but he panders." bucket D: "What? It's nice outside. I wasn't paying attention."
It's a meaningless story about a guy who, by his own admission, has written several books just for the attention. Then he meets, dates, and marries a girl in the space of a single paragraph, which somehow justifies the entire experience.
Now here I am, reading it on Hacker News, just wishing it would go away. We can debate internet philosophy (interacting with a System vs a Community) all day, but I'll just go ahead and concede the entire battle to you right now, because you're right, it was a bad comment made for unsound reasons. However, I am not a rational agent and will not delete it.
This is the first time in a while I have seen an article I disliked so much get up so high on the front page, so I feel obligated to explain my position to others so that they will think more carefully about what they vote up.
It seems that books are like startups- unless you hit a huge home run, you really shouldn't be doing it for the money.
Simple, he hates religion but spends a lot of time on it.