I'm not -- I'm just more of a Conway's Game of Life expert than 99.9999% of the world's population. But that's just due to experience and invested time, not cleverness.
Could probably add at least one more nine to the end of that number, and maybe two ... the CGOL community is very widely dispersed geographically but it's really very small. There just aren't very many Conway's Life Expert candidates out there! For me to hit 99.999999%, there would have to be fewer than eighty people out there who have more knowledge about Conway's Life than I do
At least for certain topics -- like the reverse caber tosser, for example --
https://conwaylife.com/wiki/Reverse_caber-tosser
-- I'm fairly confident that I can list pretty much every person in the world who has a deep knowledge of the workings of 15-glider RCT universal construction ... and there are a lot less than eighty of them.
No, that's not how it works. You can't do illegal things to someone on the basis that they consented. You can't go around killing people saying "well they were fine with it".
Similarly, Facebook can't be building profiles for people when that's illegal, whether they consent to it or not.
Car rental price comparision website shows EURO currency in quotes , then the car renter says only USD in cash and they convert by their own exchange - you overpay.
You have different price on reservation and different at the counter when you pick up the car key. At the time of picking up you already paid 10% fee online, so its not worth to cancel.
I think, first principle is to build something that people want.
If you build this way, I feel more comfortable than building something fast, that at the end has close to zero usage.
2 - 7 eng dev teams is a small one. It means, just put people on top of things and things should develop faster than in a an average team in any corporation.
This approach/mindset might not work in corporations etc. since they want to have "reports"
I agree 100%, you need to have a strong product foundation to turn good output into good business outcome. A productive team that delivers features no one wants is pointless. Both go hand in hand, but as far as engineering management goes, it is still a challenge to find a good productivity metric. What’s used in your organization @przeor and what do you think of it?
> "Tell me something that's true, that almost nobody agrees with you on."
> You won't find this on HN because signal to noise ratio is low in such discussions and you will get downvoted.
Over the years I've had several comments that I consider "something that's true, that almost nobody agrees with [me] on" that attracted many upvotes, good replies, and emails from people interested to know more.
It took quite a bit of practice to learn how to phrase things in a way that could meet people where they're at and take them on the same kind of journey of realisation that I'd been through. The requirement to do that applies to any topic that almost nobody agrees with you on; that is not a particular aspect of HN's culture, it is inherent to the way broader society functions.
If you want to change people's minds about something on a topic where almost everyone holds a particular belief or assumption, it's going to take some effort and care.
The OP's comment that they’re complaining about isn't about something that "almost nobody agrees with [them] on", it's a pretty standard talking point right now and throughout the history of technologies that displace human labor.
It's fine to post comments like that, and I agree with them that the discussion it initiated is worthwhile, but if people downvote that kind of comment, it's probably because they find the point repetitive and would prefer to see comments that introduce new ideas.
That said, if anyone ever sees a comment that's really solid but that they think has been unfairly downvoted, they can always email [email protected] and ask for it to be reviewed.
> Had a lot of karma collected, then a comment with different opinion against point of view of HN wasted it.
I was under the impression a comment couldn’t get you more than four negative points. Apparently that’s true for the comment itself but further downvotes keep subtracting from the user’s karma¹. I’m curious for the rationale.
If you’re willing to share I’d be interested on a ballpark figure of how much karma you had and what the comment was². Your case is the first I’ve heard of such a situation and seems quite extreme. I’m wondering why the comment wasn’t flagged, for example, which would have stopped downvotes.
I frequently see differing opinions on HN (one need only look at the AI discussions, with top comments both pro and against) so I’ve never been convinced by this idea of the HN hive mind / groupthink.
I'd generalise this to other forums, or even society in general, to a large extent. Ultimately, we must accept that these systems are made up of people, and no matter how enlightened, humans will be humans :)
In particular, I do agree with your larger sentiment here, I myself have felt like the spectrum of views tolerated here is quite limited.
