Hacker News Reader

Comment by citricsquid | Hacker News Reader

Rapgenius is seriously wonderful. I've been listening to more and more rap recently and using rapgenius to find and understand lyrics, the fact that they have the people writing the tracks commenting on the interpretations (via videos) makes it even better.

I finally got to contribute to the site a few weeks ago and I was super happy when they accepted my contribution, I don't know why I was happy, I only got to fix a typo, but it still felt great.

I have no idea how they can make money and the idea seemed silly to me the first time I heard about it ("a site where people explain lyrics is part of yc?") but after using it I'm in love. My enjoyment of rap music has increased thanks to rapgenius.

View on HN

The dying reply to this post mentions quality control for explanations. It's definitely a real concern. Not all of the explanations are spot on. Some are outright wrong, some are definitely thrown up very quickly for fast karma, some are shallow explanations, some are jokes and not really explanations at all. That aside, we're dealing with poetry -- obviously some things are open to interpretation.

For those curious of use outside of rap music, you can see The Bill of Rights (50% explained) by James Madison ft. Thomas Jefferson [1].

1: http://rapgenius.com/James-madison-the-bill-of-rights-lyrics

I don't mind the jokes - I actually find it fits the culture. They should expands with a another site for "normal" content though. Using Rap Genius has obvious branding issues...

I believe their longterm plan will go turn their platform into a framework to build other niche communities. Sort of like the relationship between Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange.

When I click on "unreasonable searches and seizures," I get this... excellent... explanation:

This part of the Constitution is supposed to guarantee that 5-0 can’t fuck with you (unless they have “probable cause”)

But — the Conservatives found a way around this by allowing a “stop and frisk” aka “Terry stop” if cops have “reasonable suspicion” (this is why they are still allowed to fuck with you) (see Terry v. Ohio)

In an automobile, cops are often held to the “plain view” standard, although the Roberts court has recently increased their ability to fuck with you (see Beacoats v. Georgia)

Nowadays, keeping “your glove compartment locked” is not enough to protect you, as it was in the Jay-Z/Clinton era of liberal jurisprudence in criminal procedure.

While this is a wonderful text and an unimpeachable use of the technology, I can't avoid reflecting that certain initial choices of brand identification may present serious practical concerns in a prospective attempt to pivot and expand.

It would be more excellent if it were factually correct. Becoats (note spelling, and no relation) v. The State is a Georgia State Supreme Court decision about search dogs that has nothing to do with the Roberts court, which has been mixed to liberal on 4th Amendment issues.

The rule about locking your glove compartment isn't because the police have less rights to search a locked glove box than an unlocked one; it's because police lie that a search was consensual when challenged, and a broken lock makes that awkward.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com