Hacker News Reader

kickon Dynamic linking

The point of the first half of his comment was very obviously pointing out that "form is less important than content" is wrong; Saagar wasn't doing it for no reason, and wasn't doing it in bad faith. That's why it was in an entirely different tone than the rest of the comment, and just about every other comment he's ever made on this site.

kickon Dynamic linking

HN commenters being able to say so is everything that's right with HN.

This would be correct, if the objection were right. But the commentator was objectively incorrect, in a way that could have been avoided with something as small as a web search, and the comment had the audacity to do so in a condescending way. I didn't knock anyone who had a genuine objection to the post, I replied to an incredibly low-effort and low-quality comment pointing out that it was low-effort and low-quality.

Commenting that a comment is exemplary of all that's wrong with HN is... popular, I'll grant you that, but it grates, and it's not really right.

This is the first one I've ever made, and I post pretty frequently. I don't think it's wrong whatsoever, and I'm standing by it.

It's a "shut up" argument.

It absolutely is a "shut up" argument. Comments should not be written when they can't get the simplest of facts straight, and authors of them should think before they post.

No need to disparage commenters.

I didn't, I disparaged their comment. I don't think doing so was wrong, either, because the comment was practically equivalent to replying to a well-considered post with a PNG of a meme.

kickon Dynamic linking

This one in particular was done terribly, and is imitating ones in the same style. I don't dislike the act of disagreement, nor even disagreements in this vein, I dislike the act of being confident, and further condescending ("is cute"), while making so many obvious mistakes that could be corrected with even a speck of knowledge about what you're talking about.

kickon Dynamic linking

the article ignored the few libraries that get shared a lot

The author didn't ignore this, because it's pretty much false. Every package people insisted was relevant, he shot down before he published the article. Example:

https://cmpwn.com/@sir/104406644780241359

Hitchen's razor.

kickon Dynamic linking

This comment hits all of the boxes for everything that is wrong with Hacker News.

"First, false statement. Since you know false assumption, I would false conclusion. And of course, this means false conclusion. I'd like to see analysis done on what you did them on."

"Second, the arguments seem a little cherry-picked. "Quote from article about W and Z" is cute. But modern systems have a lot of Z, and Obviously You Didn't Consider This."

"Finally, we're already having serious problems getting Thing the Author Almost Always Rags on for Sucking to upgrade when a security vulnerability is found. Requiring recompilation of all transitive users who the author doesn't care about and who the author has already told are wrong is not likely to win any update speed contests for a use-case the author thinks is invalid. If it's completely automated then the perceived invalid use case would still be viable, but any rocks in the process will leave people with perceived invalid use case endlessly vulnerable. See Notoriously Bad Ecosystem That Isn't Relevant to the Article, etc."

kickon What I learned from writing for The Onion for a month (2015)

If it's any consolation, that was hilarious.