In the old days I don’t remember as much political / world news allowed.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
But I’ve seen more types of TV news stories going through, like stories about political protests, stories about politics in Eastern Europe, free speech debates, etc.
Without getting into the details of each particular submission I’m curious if you think the submission standards have remained consistent throughout the years or if your curation philosophy has changed at all and if so, in what ways?
P.S. Thanks for all you do as mods and for making HN an a valuable and unique community. It’s awesome to go to a thread and see helpful links or comments that enhance the conversation.
The short answer is that not much has changed, including the perceptions of change (e.g. "HN is becoming 2005 Slashdot" - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6157485 - August 2013.)
If anyone wants to understand our thinking about political topics on HN, here are some links:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21607844
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22902490
or you can look at these past explanations: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
p.s. In case anyone's worried, no, we're not letting (or going to let) HN be taken over by politics. The proportions are stable and carefully regulated, although there is fluctuation, as with any stochastic process.
On politics, Hacker News itself isn't right-wing, at least most of its users aren't, but the fact that anything more than a standard deviation to the left gets you hammered through that passive aggressive rank-altering and "slowban" has really put a damper on the ability for people to indulge their intellectual curiosities. Simply asking whether we, who "hack" in service to corporate capitalism, are doing the right thing, is enough to get you in trouble.
There are some absolute top-notch people posting here, but there are far too many corporate shills, and the good ones know they have to be careful.
I distinctly remember reading articles about major world events in the beginning as well so it's not entirely new, but it has grown a little.
I don't think it's a problem, and this is coming from a centrist that typically doesn't care for political discussion on any medium.
As one of the people who thinks that more (too much more) political content has crept in here, I will say that I agree with you on the above. That is, I agree that it is becoming harder (albeit not impossible!) to disambiguate what is "tech" versus what is "politics" when it comes to things like the discussions around, eg "social media's affect on society" and etc.
And to be fair, talking about tech has always tended to lead to a certain amount of political discussion, especially in terms of things like encryption policy, DRM, etc. So even I wouldn't try to say we should have zero political content here. But it does seem like it's grown a bit more prevalent than I'd prefer.
However, I am saddened with the diminishing engagement with actual hard tech stories (not tech opinion pieces) that reach the front page. Lately, it seems like links to stories about people doing cool software or hardware things with complete write-ups can barely muster enough upvotes to stay on the front page very long, if at all. The comments occasionally yield some fun further discussions, but not like they did 5+ years ago on HN. It seems the interests of the average HN upvoter (who ultimately shapes what we see on the front page) are shifting more toward the political and controversy type pieces.
It uses the same algorithm, but only counts upvotes from accounts created before 2012 (iirc).
EDIT: I was slightly off, the deadline is 2008: https://github.com/minimaxir/hacker-news-undocumented#hacker...
But it’s pretty obvious on “hard tech stories” that few people have the knowledge to meaningfully contribute.
As I get older, the saying “it’s better to remain quiet and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt” resonates more and more.
By definition, as the site becomes more popular, more obscure technologies/projects will be pushed to the edges, especially when it comes to the front page.
Having a more robust search and tagging system would help with that, it’s analogous to how Reddit had to move to a vast number of sub-Reddit‘s once it got popular.
And more broadly speaking, what are the roles of technology in an extremely political sensitive climate. Should Telegram do A or B, and what about Whatsapp, Facebook moderation, Apple App Store disallow certain group, is that a curation problem or a political problem? Fake News, Yellow Journalism, none of these are "new". But now they happen on Tech rather than traditional media, is that a tech problem or a political problem? We just dont have any concrete answer.
There are other Geopolitics issues. I mean if WW3 did start surely that is important enough for HN submission. Or China decide to invade Taiwan, so to speak. Surely the threat of TSMC Foundry supply is important enough for submission even if the article itself doesn't mention TSMC.
So while the rule is not black and white as zero politics discussions. I think the moderation is fairly consistent. Still dont know how Dang manages it. To the point I sometimes worry about him leaving YC, and HN may never be the same again.
In light of this pretty natural scope creep, I agree with the above point that the moderation feels pretty consistent, and am, for one, extremely appreciative of Dang's work.
Nah. Yesterday's political topic (there's almost always at least one per day) was about the WWII Tokyo firebombing.
I think the real answer is even simpler: I think dang (or whoever is on duty that day) asks themselves "is this topic going to lead to an interesting conversation, or will it devolve into a shitshow?" Shitshows generally get canned, no matter the subject. It's benign dictatorship at work.
I feel that, if this is the reasoning it's becoming more prevalent, then it should be reeled in a bit. Politically charged topics seem to rarely bring in good-faith discussion I have come to expect from HN.
In the decade-plus I've been around, there has always been a small but steady stream of nontech political content. Despite the policy. My perception is that hasn't increased or decreased, though it does have periodic surges (say, US election season). I personally think it adds to the appeal of HN - in moderation, of course. Political conversations here are generally better informed and more polite than they are in other places, and I tend to learn more than I would by solely reading formal news sources.
And even in those rare political posts I find, the discourse is very different from other places. I think that boils down to the golden rule of comments: "thoughtful and substantive". I've noticed the culture of HN is to downvote any comment that does not adhere to this rule, regardless of whether you agree with it or not. Even in comments I've posted about China that ended with a sentence about how I disliked the leader got knocked for being counterproductive.
At the end of the day, you can have the most frought and divisive thread here and the comments are going to all be far more civil and thoughful than on Reddit or Facebook because even thought everyone might be up in arms, all of them are going "well I'll show them! types long thoughtful comment that addresses everyone's grievances"
I remember a single Covid scientific paper turning into a 500 post political discussion.
Or tech giants and censorship and privacy. How does one separate tech from politics in this sense?
Maybe society has become more political and it's making it's way to link aggregator sites?
And so you're correct - politics and technology is intertwined, but HN is happy to suppress conversation that would arguably lead to discussing technological solutions.
The biggest problem is our information distribution/propagation (and therefore trust) apparatus is corrupted, which does include the issue with low-to-no-effort downvotes allowing a person to suppress content while getting rewarded via a dopamine hit.
There is the additional issue that tech has crept into everything and the internet is where modern state-sponsored disinformation and misinformation campaigns are being fought.
Tech is maturing and a consequence of that process is that politics develops. It's not necessarily a bad thing as the cynics say.
But now some of the hot topics in tech are also hot topics in politics-- privacy and mass surveillance, platform censorship, vaccinations/medicine(which were a little political, became super political), affirmitive action in the tech industry, etc...
I don't know if we'll ever go back to where we were as tech plays a larger and larger role. And if you think we're intertwined now, just wait until the metaverse!
-posts about nostalgia, how the 'old' world wide web was better, retro computing, reliving the past, etc.
-quanta magazine math articles, because the concepts are too difficult or abstract for anyone to debate or discuss them
-posts about privacy, big tech bashing (gets tired, repetitive after while)
I would like to see fewer of those kind of posts. I would like to see more:
-personal blog posts
-posts about economics findings (instead of just the 'hard' sciences)
The world, technology & online culture have changed so much over these years. I don't think submission/curation standards could have remained consistent throughout.
Google, FB and internet companies becoming $>trn companies happened in that time period. Crime, sports & politics have become intertwined with the stuff that was on topic back in the day. FB or Twitter's policies are a major factor in elections worldwide. That's inevitably political. Cybersecurity, infosecurity and even (silly as it sounds) meme-wars are playing a big role in the current eastern european affair.
TV news came to us, moreso than we went to it...I think.
Good luck with that. One person’s apolitical feel good story is a nefarious propaganda piece in another person’s eyes.
(Interpreting “about politics” to also encompass “political”.)
There was a change a while back that made the front page less volatile, around that time you started seeing stories merged more often, and traditional news creeping in a bit more. I think it is sort of like a lightning rod to keep the rest of the front page pure. Before that stories would show up and get flagged constantly, and the front page would change multiple times an hour.
One thing that I have noticed is that 2020 was a bit of an eternal september for hn. Many times I see people posting things that don't really seem to work with the hn style, but they have a fairly high karma count and an account that was created in or after 2020. I think maybe a bunch of people suddenly working from home felt safe to use the internet without a boss over their shoulder, and needed a bit of community they were missing from not going in the office. This influx has watered down the ability of hn to aggressively flag/downvote politics, dumb jokes, etc.
Though, all in all it's still mostly the same it has been in the last 10 years or so.
I hadn't connected that to a pandemic-induced demand increase, but that could well be true.
As for submissions (rather than comments), it does feel like HN has shifted more towards broader industry and politics news, rather than just tech and programming. I'm okay with this, in fact HN has displaced Reddit for me thanks to the much higher standard of discourse, although I do worry a bit about marginalizing the crunchy tech content for those who come here for that.
Without fail :) Thanks @dang!
As in, it exists now. All of it. Already in the three letter agencies and social networks, you know or can extrapolate what everyone's opinion and views and compliance and "danger" to the regime.
Right now.
All it takes is a strongman from the D or R side to turn the key. So the political stakes are being reflected in the current capabilities of authoritarian large scale information technology for tracking.
Your web3 crypto blockchain will not help, they will own all the entry/exit points, and use of crypto will mark you as noncompliant and destined for the gulag.
I remember back when Carnivore was dismissed as conspiracy talk and I mostly agreed. And then came Snowden, and I remember the revelation of "wow I wasn't nearly paranoid enough".
Right now I will be gulag'd if the wrong party turns the key. Even if I don't make another political comment anywhere on the internet, I have decades of easily breadcrumbed data hoovered up that will lead straight to labor camps.
The fragile state of our government means that the existing authoritarian abilities of the NSA/CIA/etc are a far bigger existential threat to me than nuclear weapons, COVID, war, and maybe even on par with heart disease, cancer, and car crashes.
An alternate theory: they have cooperatively turned that key together, although I wouldn't expect everyone is in on it, or that "the key" is something in particular, other than a "general methodology" of how politics is performed, in the theatrical sense of the word.
Both these ostensibly tech-related stories have strong political undercurrents.
In the old days, politics and world news were not as intertwined with technology as they are today.
A key problem is that these days a lot of techie/nerdy/geeky/hackery news has a potential political angle. Advances in cryptography, drones, medical matters, and many other things, increasingly touch on politics because they touch the wider world not just techie people and often do so in decisive ways.
Take face recognition and similar tech: all cool as the tech on its own, but there are scary implications that we see forming already so even if the original post is a purely technical & politics free look at a new development the comment threads resulting from it often won't be.
Conversely, political issues affect technical ones: free speech or the lack there of both has an impact on the use of current tech and drives ideas for future systems, so while seen as a political matter by some (a philosophical matter or both by others) there are valid interesting technical discussions that can be had relating to changes in those issues around the globe.
> In the old days
I think some of that is that in the old days the connection wasn't as “real” because the tech being discussed was not widely used, or was in fact still only theoretical. Now the tech is out there, and many are using it including many who have no specific technical bent because these things are becoming part of normal life. Once tech touches real life, it touches the sticky subjective messy aspects of real life: politics & morality. Also even when things are still theoretical, the developments are more open to the general public for better or worse because access to information (and, of course, misinformation) continues to become increasingly ubiquitous.
Take cryptocurrency as an example. A decade or so ago it was just a techie plaything really. People were talking about what wider impacts it could have, but it wasn't having them yet and it wasn't clear that it actually would in the end. It is easy to be dispassionate and unpolitical at that point. Now though some of those impacts have happened and continue to happen, and can affect lives in significant ways, so new stories on the subject can't help but attract some political discussion as well as going over the technical developments, or in fact are news stories about developments that are happening because of (to aid or circumvent) political concerns.
For another collection of subject matter that has seen a massive change in public and political interest, you only have to look at the last couple of years development in certain fields of biology.
There is little moderation here or elsewhere can do about this significant set of changes & movements. The mods and the community can nudge things in a certain direction, but they can't fully control them.
When I tried posting a technology angle to this - "Ask HN: Do we care about our captured systems?" - to point out that it's the design of platforms like Twitter, Reddit, YouTube, etc. that's allowing propaganda and ideology to easily get to the top, while easily suppressing the truth - and where on HN it's easy to suppress perfectly valid, well-written, articulate comments to prevent the majority from seeing ideas that may actually be the truth.
It's a problem.
Edit to add: Thanks for all the fish, enjoy your lazy dopamine hit.
Presumably every single member of this community is also a member of one or more other communities, some of which have an overt intention to be "more political". Given that, no one is being denied an outlet to share their views, give input, discuss, influence, vote, etc. when it comes to political events. So what is it so particularly important that this community be "political" (I'll just hand wave around exactly what we mean by "political" for now, for the sake of discussion)?
Personally I come here (mainly) to hear about / discuss obscure programming libraries, new programming languages, startup strategies, new scientific breakthroughs, etc. I get enough of "general politics" and "world news" elsewhere... I'd really rather not see it here as well. But, that's just me.
For example of the second, there was a thread on /ck/ a few weeks back where some guy (probably a grad student; I'll never know) stumbled on a few $K of food lab equipment. Thread went on with a variety of experiments/projects which ranged from "reasonable" to "why would you even consider this" (some kind of flavored oil distillate from a happy meal, used to make ice cream).
If that was on HN, it would be someone's social-climbing portfolio blog, or I would have to wonder if it's astroturfing by some lab equipment company, or Mcdonalds. I'd question if this really was a curiosity-based endeavor, or if it was just someone trying to signal to potential employers "look at my Relevant Project!" or "look how quirky I am!" to friends.
But none of that was a concern; there is really no way for that individual to profit or benefit from this in any context. It's an anonymous forum, and there's strong social pressure to not subvert that (unless it is simply by virtue of posting similar content). It takes the game theory out of the equation; nobody is trying to sell me something.
It's not for everything or everyone, and there's definitely some effort in filtering out garbage posts. The same goes for HN, except the content to manually filter out is the sea of sometimes-veiled advertisements and self-promotion rather than plain-faced flamebait.
Schopenhauer's commentary on authorship and intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivations should be far more widely read.
I've even seen a number of subreddits with no moderators/inactive moderators which were pretty good, even with a few thousand members.
I suppose might be that the forums you're discussing may be one of the ones created with the express selling point of having low/no moderation, while these other places where created as a place to have discussions first and foremost.
Emphasis on "the old". Usenet in the early to mid 90s was pretty great too, but again, emphasis on "the old". Niches that haven't been discovered by many people yet will likely always function well.
But I had the impression that you habe to ignore a swath of racism, sexism, homo/transphobia, and conspiracy theory to find them.
If people with non-"odious" views end up at such a platform, they will quickly notice the unusual concentration of "odious" views, and generally find it uncomfortable and leave. Thus there is a steady increase in the prevalence of "odious" views until they are near-universal on the platform.
What's really funny is how all discussions they host have to be approached from that angle.
So you can't just talk about your favorite TV show. You have to first make a nod to how it features a Jewish conspiracy to push black-white interracial relationships. Only then can you go on to discuss the actual episode.
I can't really blame them for not stepping up to the plate and saying 'fuck off', since the genesis of the site had to do with Reddit overmoderation, and even appearing to step into the same shoes could have had killed the site.
The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly paradoxical idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance. [0]
To truly be open to everything you have to make a lot of analysis and filtering effort. If you go to a lot of the sort of information sources the GP mentioned, the signal-to-noise ratio is so low that unless you have literally nothing to do with your day the chance of finding some useful truth is neg liable (sometimes even zero, because sometimes the signal is not just downed out by noise it is actively beaten away by it).
I seek truth as unconditionally as it is practical for me to do so.
The issue with free speech platforms is they attract a crowd of people whose only narrative is one that can't be said in other places. It isn't a narrative of truth, it is one of hate and bigotry.
I've seen few examples where objective truth is banned. I have, however, seen a lot of Nazis get banned.
I love you, Hacker News, but you’re toxic
Even Mr. management-by-perkele Linus has lightened up these days.
Don't know what they're all doing now, I would've said crypto but whenever I meet those people they're unreasonably positive.
At this point I'm actively looking for a replacement community that focuses much more on ML and Linux, and not on the social issues associated with machine learning, or social justice warriors messing up tech firms, or people who seem to get their "science" from Fox News.
2. Just because others make bad comments, it doesn't mean you should, too.
3. Your type of bad comment is the one there's a rule against, while there's no explicit rule about being wrong.
I went through months of your comment history with showdead:true, I could only find a handful of interactions between you and the moderation staff.
The most recent example is about 10 days ago and then one 36 days ago. Both comments were gray from being downvoted and one has been flagged.
There was another one about 40 days ago that had a bit more content to it but was simply you quoting yourself where you call a concept idiotic... on a post that had a pinned comment by Dang that said "If you're going to comment, please focus on specific, interesting things in the article that you're curious about."
Dang exchanged with you politely to explain the issues every times.
What more do you want?
Personally, I know that I don't want to see content such as your "y'all look like a cult" comment. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29864386>
;
>>absolutely untrue covid vax denialism
Yeah, So a bit of background -- Both of my brothers are fully vax'd and what not. But take my elder brother:
- Personal physician (flight surgeon) to the joint chiefs at the pentagon
- Commander of the 10th medical wing in the USAF (80,000 servicemen and families)
- Director of the entire VA for the state of AK
- Now the CMO for a large hospital group
We have a LONG history in medicine. (i personally have built multiple hospitals (tech side) but my family has been in medicine for ~80 years at this point...
Yeah, I have a heart condition, and I will NEVER get a vax due to my fear of myocarditis... (inflamation of the tissue surrounding the heart) (exacerbated if you have any form of heart disease)
denialism as you call it, requires data, TRUSTED DATA - and medications require long-term review to determine their safety.
NONE of this applies to covid vax?
Nuremburg ring a bell at all? Consent is a word, no? Have you ever consented to rape? Shall you now be forced to accept something sans data, "because we tell you to"?
--
I absolutely detest the idea that people who are anti vax are somehow 'wrong'
It is a messy topic, but I am not vax denialist but here is a cool fact for you:
When my middle daughter was ~3 she got the chicken pox vaccine just before we flew to chicago to build out the Salesforce Office I was managing...
After arrival in Chicago, our intention was to go to the Zoo the next day...
Late in the envening my daughter was fussing...
She got the chicken pox FROM THE VACCINE
She spent over a week in the hotel room in a calamine bath and we had to extend our trip another week because she couldnt fly due to the pox.
I personally got the chicken pox TWICE (at 6 months and at 14 years) -- AND I WAS VACCINATED.
My elder brother also expresses I should not get the vaccine.
Tldr Hacker News is seriously the worst moderated forum with the worst posters, except for all the other ones.
> Gackle, whose name is pronounced “Gack-lee” and who declined to share his age, is a muscular, bald, and loquacious father of two and a devoted fan of the Canadian sketch-comedy show “The Kids in the Hall.”
So... an AI that can do deepfakes as well? Amazing.
Macroexpanded:
The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News (2019) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25048415 - Nov 2020 (291 comments)
The Lonely Work of Moderating Hacker News - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20643052 - Aug 2019 (777 comments)
Reading this, I felt the description hit very close to home with regards to a substantive amount of discourse here. I also learned a new word!
Without such an option the logical alternative is to periodically cycle your username, amassing somewhat of a sockpuppet army if you are so inclined.
It's complicated. A simulation would be interesting.
The first is that a lot of the moderation is done algorithmically. Things like "flamewar detector" cool down stories that look like they are getting too many comments.
The second is that user flagging plays a very large role. For better or worse, if some tiny percentage of users think a comment or story is inappropriate for the site, it disappears. User vouching then plays a smaller but also important role in reviving some of these.
The last is that 'sctb' is no longer involved, and 'dang' is the sole remaining moderator. Sometimes I think he encourages people to believe that 'sctb' is still involved because he'd be embarrassed if people knew how much time and effort he puts into the site.
Do you not experience some kind of information overload from monitoring all those stories and comments on HN? How are you able to handle all of that?
Otherwise I just want to say thank you for maintaining this forum and making sure it stays interesting.
Later, it's like having one's brain sandblasted: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que.... I don't remember most details but I pattern-match quickly.
It's probably not so different from doing any other rather-specific thing enough times.
I also wrote a browser extension with a lot of keyboard shortcuts that by now has close to 10 years of learning baked into it. It doesn't make any decisions but it lets me do repetitive things faster. One of these years I want to open source it (or make it a profile option to serve as JS) so people who like keyboard shortcuts can flip around the threads more easily. It just requires surgery to take out the mod-only bits, which is a bit like separating conjoined twins.
Now all you need to do is to use machine learning to learn the shortcuts, and then use them. Then you will have automated half of your job :P
A few bullets..
1. Does the moderators use some form of automation to extract suspicious posts/comments or they go manually scanning all posts with the full threads? I'm just finding it to be extremely difficult to monitor 24/7 manually.
2. It's really an interesting story this "SkySheet" and just heard about it.
3. I believe this article would be of another level if it was recorded as a podcast where we can hear their natural voices in a live discussion.
4. Am I the only one who find it extremely difficult to understand why [some] HNewsers don't and, won't follow the site guidelines, go blind and write whatever will fill this gap in their ego?!
Mods, probably don't say it enough, but most of us deeply appreciate you!
I won't post links to examples here because, again, that is probably not within the site guidelines. But I'm happy to supply on request.
Outside that extreme sort of comment, though, the problem is not as simple as it sounds, or feels, because there's no consensus on how to define or interpret these terms. That means any particular moderation call is going to end up feeling wrong to a sizeable subset of users—good-faith users, not bigots or trolls. Put a few of those data points together and pretty much every reader is going to find a pattern to dislike. It's literally impossible to avoid this, even if we could see everything.
One consequence is that we/I regularly get lambasted with every horrible label that exists in polite society (a clarifying example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22941387), because most people misinterpret a sequence of bad-data-point experiences to mean "the mods must agree with and support this kind of thing".
I wish I could get across to people how these perceptions are unavoidable given the stochastics of the site (HN is a statistical cloud) and how our brains deal with randomness (by strongly overinterpreting it). I've been writing about this for years - a lot of which shows up in these links: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... and https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... - but it doesn't really land. Even if one knows these things intellectually, it doesn't change how they feel, and the feeling determines everything.
Joe Biden could point out, correctly, that he'll receive criticism both from the left and the right whatever choices he makes. But so what? It doesn't follow from this that he's actually making the right decisions, or that he's found some kind of perfect middle way, or that he doesn't have any discernible political leanings. Nor does it follow that anyone who thinks that Joe Biden is left (or right) of center has been deceived by some kind of statistical artefact or cognitive illusion – though no doubt some of them may have been.
So I'm not sure that I buy the claim that HN is striking the roughly the right balance because roughly as many people call you a Commie as call you a Nazi. I mean, who cares what people hurling thoughtless insults think? Since when were they the instrument by which we calibrate the range of acceptable discourse?
One possibly constructive suggestion. It might help if there was some kind of explicit indication that an account had been banned. It would be reassuring to see this when stumbling across some horrible post from a negative karma account. I bet a lot of these accounts have been banned, but there's no visible indication of that.
HN does have such policy.
The issue is some users think anything right of Trotsky is "racist", "White supremacy culture", etc. It's a term that has almost lost all practical meaning in $CURRENT_YEAR.
>But I'm happy to supply on request.
I'd love to see some examples, because practically every instance I've seen of racism in the comments section has been [flagged] quickly. I flag it everytime I come across it, and I rarely come across it these days.
What on earth does this mean!?
Hacker news will probably go the way of Reddit, steady decline in quality, and everything infected with politics.
Note that the last one or two actually predate Hacker News, because it was called Startup News for the few first months.
A peek behind the curtain, and what I see is what I expect.
What a fantastic job you all (both? still?) do.
Truly anarchism in action. A wonderful thing. Nothing should last foever - long may you run!
What's amusing is the post on the front-page: "Web 2.0 is a bubble for 3 reasons" yet seeing the same for Web 3.0.
HN from 2007 http://web.archive.org/web/20070221033032/https://news.ycomb...
Edit: Strange downvotes...
dang, could you please describe your Emacs setup?
Obviously, the other thing to say here is to share your emacs configuration, as is the tradition. But your call! :)
Anyway, thanks for all the moderating work!
Vibehut.io is a great solution to get your social fix. Vetted video calls based on your existing social platform and crypto holdings.
I would take HN over the water cooler talk, after work drinks and work sports.
Coffee walks ... probably worth keeping. Possibly an occasional workplace lunch too.
But then again, I've worked "alone" at home for more than 20 years, and so the social side of working life has felt fairly foreign to me forever.
