| Tweets |
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 29 |
|
Both parts of this statement, that this has been addressed and that State Farm does not "engage in this sort of activity", appear to be false?
Elsewhere in the HN thread, other people note that the exact same thing has happened to them. pic.twitter.com/soNsrfh4jU
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 29 |
|
Do you checksum your data and scrub it regularly?
Other way to phrase this is, do you think you haven't had data corruption or that you haven't observed data corruption?
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 25 |
|
...since that changes all the time, can vary because someone negotiated a great deal, etc. Also, having a dollar value is nice because you can compare to non-hardware costs, like headcount.
If that's quarter-baked, I wonder what you'd think of ideas that I consider half baked?
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 25 |
|
I often build tools that do this!
When I don't have tools that output a dollar value, I keep mind the TCO ratio between CPU, RAM, network, disk, etc., but I don't think it's reasonable to expect devs working on services to know that ratio off the top of their head...
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 22 |
|
I thought it was by rakyll, but I'm not sure about that and I feel like I'm thinking of a different tweet than the one quoted.
The closest one I could find was this one, but I think that's also not what I was thinking of twitter.com/rakyll/status/…
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 22 |
|
I'd like to link to the tweet in a blog post that describes the version of the system you normally only hear about at the bar as a justification for discussing the "real" system, warts and all, but I haven't figured out the exact search I need to return the tweet :-(.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 22 |
|
Can you help me find a tweet?
Someone tweeted something like "talks describe an idealized version of the system, if you want to know what the system was really like, you have to talk to the speaker after the talk and public Q&A".
Who tweeted that and/or what's the link?
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 21 |
|
This reminds me of HIPAA. Up to maybe 2010 or so, I would sometimes be told that I couldn't get a copy of my own medical records because it would be a HIPAA violation.
That's literally the opposite of correct, but most medical providers basically had no idea what HIPAA was.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
...but it's improving.
OTOH, being less nasty and entitled than HN isn't a super high bar and, IMO, it's not there yet.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
FWIW, I think lobsters comments have gotten a lot better since the moderation regime change. IMO there's still a higher fraction of mean-spritited (poster is bad and should feel bad) and entitled (poster should have written it to satisfy my preferences) comments than on HN...
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
Comments don't seem to be available at archive.org because they were dynamic? That's unfortunate.
web.archive.org/web/2014091823…
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
That's a bad example because it would probably get some matching answers since, if you start naming cars at random, you'll name some 4d non-hatchbacks. But if the question can't be trivially answered by ignoring all of the criteria, then the asker will probably not get an answer.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
It usually won't be phrased with an XOR and will instead be phrased like "I'm looking for a car that has 4 doors or is a hatchback, but not both"
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
...since the comments couldn't possibly make sense if someone had read the paper.
Maybe this is an unusual example because it's a paper, but I don't think that it's *all* that different when the link is a blog post and not a paper?
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
In general, I don't keep a record of this, but I happen to have an email written about news.ycombinator.com/item?id=149153… when I tracked this. For a while, zero commenters had read anything. At 32 comments, 2 had read the abstract but it's clear that no one had read the actual paper...
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
...it will seem as if a decent fraction of people read the post, but I think it only looks like that because people who didn't read the post get discouraged from commenting by the comment calling out the people who didn't read the post
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
When a post is mis-titled, if you read it at the beginning, I think there's usually a pretty long time period where there are no on topic comments. Someone will (usually) eventually note that no one is reading the post, which seems to stop that, so if you look at it afterwards...
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
But when people respond in the same way to a post by Jeff Kauffman, it's very obvious that the comment is a poor quality comment by someone who didn't read the post.
Maybe this is too facile? But I think it explains why some bloggers I read get so many obviously bad comments?
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
But for posts like PG's recent post or other widely read thought leader-y posts, comments actually seem better? What can you say to "haters are generally losers"? The posts are basically a series of rorschach tests, people can pick out any phrase and respond with their feelings.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dan Luu
@danluu
|
Jan 20 |
|
In the context of blogs, people who write posts with structured arguments (e.g., Ben Kuhn, Jeff Kauffman) almost exclusively get "bad" comments since a reasonable comment would require reading something more complex than a sentence with an AND or XOR, which is already impossible?
|
||
|
|
||