Tell HN: Flesh out your profiles please
24 comments
I think it's worth mentioning the other block of people you left out: those who risk corporate jobs or contracts simply by having opinions that an employer doesn't agree with.
Some (many?) of us have kids or other responsibilities and don't have a nest egg, relatives or soft landings.
Until our peonage is less feudal I think it's going to be this way.
Some (many?) of us have kids or other responsibilities and don't have a nest egg, relatives or soft landings.
Until our peonage is less feudal I think it's going to be this way.
That's one I hadn't thought of, indeed. I've been 'unemployed' (that's a different word for self employed) long enough that it never even crossed my mind, sorry.
On the other hand, it's a shame that it should come to the point that people are hiding who they are for fear of retribution from their employers.
On the other hand, it's a shame that it should come to the point that people are hiding who they are for fear of retribution from their employers.
:)
Yes it is a shame. For me it's a few more years to get some teenagers through HS (it's not like that's without rewards) and then I can get back to wanton risk-taking.
I spent my risk allowance for 10 years: founding a couple of lousy startups (not Silicon Valley, and it was my own damn fault that they were crapiola), and then an employer that suffered death by VC (that one wasn't my fault), so yeah, it's not like corporate is the only way in my case, it's just the recessionary cookie crumble.
Yes it is a shame. For me it's a few more years to get some teenagers through HS (it's not like that's without rewards) and then I can get back to wanton risk-taking.
I spent my risk allowance for 10 years: founding a couple of lousy startups (not Silicon Valley, and it was my own damn fault that they were crapiola), and then an employer that suffered death by VC (that one wasn't my fault), so yeah, it's not like corporate is the only way in my case, it's just the recessionary cookie crumble.
Jacquesm, what exactly would constitute a poseur around here? Are members expected to be a level n programmer or startup founder? What behavior have you witnessed that would be thwarted by calling someone a poseur after the fact? Doesn't that lead to more personal attacks?
Personally I don't know who you are and I really don't care. I care if what you write is insightful and helpful to me (and hopefully I do the same for some other people).
I'm sure I've been attacked a few times by people that might be run out of town under the no cowards policy, but I'd rather deal with ankle biters than have this place turn into a cult of personality for a handful of celebrity posters.
Btw if anyone downvotes this without a bio I'm calling you out. That's ironic humor if you're wondering. Am I qualified? Yes, I'm a startup founder with a degree in literature.
Personally I don't know who you are and I really don't care. I care if what you write is insightful and helpful to me (and hopefully I do the same for some other people).
I'm sure I've been attacked a few times by people that might be run out of town under the no cowards policy, but I'd rather deal with ankle biters than have this place turn into a cult of personality for a handful of celebrity posters.
Btw if anyone downvotes this without a bio I'm calling you out. That's ironic humor if you're wondering. Am I qualified? Yes, I'm a startup founder with a degree in literature.
Armchair founders and lawyers would be one group, cowardly attacks are a problem but less so, I've so far had exactly two directed at me, one through mail and one here on the site. I've seen a few others and for the most part the attackers find themselves at -4 or banned pretty swiftly.
The only real 'celebrity posters' I can think of are PG, patio11, cperciva, tptacek and jgrahamc and their reputations are well established and deserved in the fields they write most about, for the most part their votes seem to reflect the quality of what they write on a case-by-case basis.
For example, it's rare to see PG downvoted because most of the time what he writes makes very good sense (and I've been on the receiving end of a couple of 'you disagreed with PG downvotes' but it does happen, and that, as far as I'm concerned proves that the problem if it exists is not that large.
So inspite of the research referenced above and personal experience, even if it does happen we don't have a cult of celebrity worship here as far as I can see, but at the same time we're talking about a bunch of counters in a disk file somewhere, so assuming that we do it still isn't a problem. Maybe ask the posters I mentioned above if they feel 'worshipped' in any way?
> Btw if anyone downvotes this without a bio I'm calling you out.
Hehe, that was funny :)
And I'm just a startup founder with a typing diploma and a driving license.
The only real 'celebrity posters' I can think of are PG, patio11, cperciva, tptacek and jgrahamc and their reputations are well established and deserved in the fields they write most about, for the most part their votes seem to reflect the quality of what they write on a case-by-case basis.
For example, it's rare to see PG downvoted because most of the time what he writes makes very good sense (and I've been on the receiving end of a couple of 'you disagreed with PG downvotes' but it does happen, and that, as far as I'm concerned proves that the problem if it exists is not that large.
So inspite of the research referenced above and personal experience, even if it does happen we don't have a cult of celebrity worship here as far as I can see, but at the same time we're talking about a bunch of counters in a disk file somewhere, so assuming that we do it still isn't a problem. Maybe ask the posters I mentioned above if they feel 'worshipped' in any way?
> Btw if anyone downvotes this without a bio I'm calling you out.
Hehe, that was funny :)
And I'm just a startup founder with a typing diploma and a driving license.
You've got me coming around a bit on that. But I haven't yet seen a comment where I felt I was getting bad legal advice or an insincere 'fail early, often' or anything similar. I could see it useful in say a discussion of operating a site at massive scale when the poster's sys admin skills were limited to a WP blog.
But usually in those cases people qualify what they're saying with, 'I worked on x and we did y'. I think you have to qualify what you're saying in that way. It's presumptuous to assume people know who you are. My background is marketing and PR (as an entrepreneur) so I usually qualify PR-related advice with a note of my experience. If people don't I usually assume they're regurgitating what someone else told them.
Anyway it's moot for me because I never check people's bios.
I don't know who any of those people are other than pg. I'm ok with that because again I'm really only interested in what they have to say. If Mr Z is on his 11th startup and is worth 23 gazillion dollars I would expect that will come through in his perspective on the industry. I hope it would at least.
Don't worry, if I could do it over again I would skip college. I wish I would have raised 1/5 of the money I had to for college and started a business. I would have learned more, faster and would probably be retired already.
But usually in those cases people qualify what they're saying with, 'I worked on x and we did y'. I think you have to qualify what you're saying in that way. It's presumptuous to assume people know who you are. My background is marketing and PR (as an entrepreneur) so I usually qualify PR-related advice with a note of my experience. If people don't I usually assume they're regurgitating what someone else told them.
Anyway it's moot for me because I never check people's bios.
I don't know who any of those people are other than pg. I'm ok with that because again I'm really only interested in what they have to say. If Mr Z is on his 11th startup and is worth 23 gazillion dollars I would expect that will come through in his perspective on the industry. I hope it would at least.
Don't worry, if I could do it over again I would skip college. I wish I would have raised 1/5 of the money I had to for college and started a business. I would have learned more, faster and would probably be retired already.
> But I haven't yet seen a comment where I felt I was getting bad legal advice or an insincere 'fail early, often' or anything similar.
I've seen more than a few, but truth be told they were usually identified as such.
> Don't worry, if I could do it over again I would skip college. I wish I would have raised 1/5 of the money I had to for college and started a business. I would have learned more, faster and would probably be retired already.
I still have contact with a few of the people from 'the old days', and I wouldn't trade with them for any amount of money, but every now and then I wished I'd gotten the benefits of at least high school calculus.
I tend to spend too much time approaching mathematical problems in a way that I can fudge my basic knowledge, in stead of for instance a direct approach using an analytical method I might code up a brute force search or a hill climbing algorithm (and pray I'm not stuck on a local maximum :) ).
The network would have come in handy as well in the beginning, but I've long ago made up for lack of that.
I've seen more than a few, but truth be told they were usually identified as such.
> Don't worry, if I could do it over again I would skip college. I wish I would have raised 1/5 of the money I had to for college and started a business. I would have learned more, faster and would probably be retired already.
I still have contact with a few of the people from 'the old days', and I wouldn't trade with them for any amount of money, but every now and then I wished I'd gotten the benefits of at least high school calculus.
I tend to spend too much time approaching mathematical problems in a way that I can fudge my basic knowledge, in stead of for instance a direct approach using an analytical method I might code up a brute force search or a hill climbing algorithm (and pray I'm not stuck on a local maximum :) ).
The network would have come in handy as well in the beginning, but I've long ago made up for lack of that.
I think I take that back - I would do college again to get a CS degree. I really enjoy programming, but it's only a fraction of my time even now that I'm doing tech. I wish I would have done CS so I would have had more time on the intellectual side of programming - both so I could program better (I fudge my way through it as well) and for the enjoyment of it.
Meh. There's enough celebrity worship around here as it is. Now you're suggesting we fill out our profiles so our posts can be voted up based on who they're authored by instead of what they contain? No thanks.
> Now you're suggesting we fill out our profiles so our posts can be voted up based on who they're authored by instead of what they contain?
Where did you read that ? The word vote isn't even in there, and that was not a suggestion I had in mind.
Where did you read that ? The word vote isn't even in there, and that was not a suggestion I had in mind.
It's kind of implied, however.
Why? Because you'd vote differently if you knew that I was me? But you already know, and I take it that it makes no difference in how you vote. So why would that be different for you?
There are many papers in psychology dealing with the influence of prestige on statement credibility. It does have a large effect and is replicated across many studies.
Whether or not you want your prestige to influence your statement credibility is entirely personal. I'd rather have it not effect it to keep myself honest.
Whether or not you want your prestige to influence your statement credibility is entirely personal. I'd rather have it not effect it to keep myself honest.
If this was that big of a deal for an online site in which you say whether you like something or not, I'd have thought that sites would hide the username from everyone until you voted on a comment/story/etc. However, in practice, its not that big of a deal. pg hasn't even experimented with it on HN afaik - and on some level, I generally think of HN as his personal experiment sandbox (either for how people behave, UI/UX or for Arc).
I propose an experiment rather than making an assumption that it's not important.
Randomly change the username on new posts from users that have a low average points per post (ppp)to a top 20 user in terms of ppp.
If there is no effect of username on ppp, then the difference between the users true average ppp and the randomly assigned one will be large, if there is an effect it will be approximately zero. We could test this statistically easily enough.
What say you pg?
Randomly change the username on new posts from users that have a low average points per post (ppp)to a top 20 user in terms of ppp.
If there is no effect of username on ppp, then the difference between the users true average ppp and the randomly assigned one will be large, if there is an effect it will be approximately zero. We could test this statistically easily enough.
What say you pg?
That's a really clever idea.
There are a few people here who have 'reputations', Paul Graham of course the #1 contender for that, and I think I can see a bit of what you mean in the voting patterns around what he writes, but on the whole it is not enough to be a source of worry.
Dismissing experimentally validated research out of hand because you personally don't want it to be true is not critical thinking, it's wishful thinking.
I didn't 'dismiss it', I just said that even if it is true I don't see it as a real problem. Unless you attribute a large importance to voting. It's not like you can take your karma to the bank.
If I did want to dismiss it I'd have said that HN possibly has a better attitude towards this than a random sample used in an experiment, but I figure HN is large enough now that such an effect if established as real will be present here too.
If I did want to dismiss it I'd have said that HN possibly has a better attitude towards this than a random sample used in an experiment, but I figure HN is large enough now that such an effect if established as real will be present here too.
I'm trained with the school of thought that says "Everything before the but is ..." you can guess the rest. Read your comment with that in mind :)
I really like the voting - it's good to know when you have said something stupid. Either everyone else is wrong or you are, and the latter is pretty unlikely :)
I really like the voting - it's good to know when you have said something stupid. Either everyone else is wrong or you are, and the latter is pretty unlikely :)
Well, maybe we didn't go to the same school then ;)
There are no words in the English language that should be dismissed with prejudice, but is one of those.
I'm not a 'native' speaker (or writer), the dutch for 'but' is 'maar', and it indicates a modification of the first part of the sentence, a qualifier.
It does not negate the preceding part but it detracts from it, so I mean that to read (and I'll try to avoid the use of 'but')
I take your word for the research, HN will have some of that that, given the general level of discourse here and having read extensively in both articles written by HN'ers and the comments I have yet to see your point proven but it is bound to be true to some extent.
Better like that? ;)
There are no words in the English language that should be dismissed with prejudice, but is one of those.
I'm not a 'native' speaker (or writer), the dutch for 'but' is 'maar', and it indicates a modification of the first part of the sentence, a qualifier.
It does not negate the preceding part but it detracts from it, so I mean that to read (and I'll try to avoid the use of 'but')
I take your word for the research, HN will have some of that that, given the general level of discourse here and having read extensively in both articles written by HN'ers and the comments I have yet to see your point proven but it is bound to be true to some extent.
Better like that? ;)
Much :)
We are now quibbling over magnitudes, which is moot since there is no data either way.
We are now quibbling over magnitudes, which is moot since there is no data either way.
You have my interest peaked though regarding the magnitude, and I really support your idea for an experiment.
Writing style apparently is not as easy to distinguish as we thought it was:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1199592
and a follow-up:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1203836
So the previously mentioned 'but we'll recognize people by their writing style if we obscure their ids' probably does not hold water.
Writing style apparently is not as easy to distinguish as we thought it was:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1199592
and a follow-up:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1203836
So the previously mentioned 'but we'll recognize people by their writing style if we obscure their ids' probably does not hold water.
In my experience on HN, up- and down-voting has little to do with right and wrong. It has to do with (a) whether or not you've contributed valuable food for thought and (b) whether or not the masses agree with your opinion.
And keeping (b) in mind, realize that it is often those opinions of an individual that conflict with the masses that contribute largely to the individual's greater-than-average success.
And keeping (b) in mind, realize that it is often those opinions of an individual that conflict with the masses that contribute largely to the individual's greater-than-average success.
I don't think this will help.
As you may have noticed, the Facebook privacy stories are rated very highly here.
For those of us in startups, we are either too busy to comment, too afraid to alienate potential customers with our opinions, or currently in stealth mode.
I'd venture to guess that most of the people here are not concerned with winning arguments on the internet by prestige, as you've described as the main reason to lose anonymity.
As you may have noticed, the Facebook privacy stories are rated very highly here.
For those of us in startups, we are either too busy to comment, too afraid to alienate potential customers with our opinions, or currently in stealth mode.
I'd venture to guess that most of the people here are not concerned with winning arguments on the internet by prestige, as you've described as the main reason to lose anonymity.
> As you may have noticed, the Facebook privacy stories are rated very highly here.
I think there may be a misunderstanding here. Facebook's problem is not that they make information about their users available, but that they do so after having been specifically directed not to. One can have no problem with the former, while being very much against the latter.
As this article (posted last week on HN)
> The battle that is underway is not a battle over the future of privacy and publicity. It’s a battle over choice and informed consent.
I think there may be a misunderstanding here. Facebook's problem is not that they make information about their users available, but that they do so after having been specifically directed not to. One can have no problem with the former, while being very much against the latter.
As this article (posted last week on HN)
http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2010/05/14/facebook-and-radical-transparency-a-rant.html
> The battle that is underway is not a battle over the future of privacy and publicity. It’s a battle over choice and informed consent.
Or not. See, that's the beauty of this, I have no interest in sharing anything on any particular site. That said, simply doing searches on my username will yield results both by myself and my father.
I have no interest in taking it further. This isn't Facebook.
I have no interest in taking it further. This isn't Facebook.
It's not that, it's just that some of us prefer to be anonymous just from things like google searches, etc.
> when someone is attaching their name - and by extension their reputation - to their words they automatically have something to lose by saying it.
Why is why I never say anything even slightly controversial for the record under my True Name. I don't know about you but I rely on getting food and shelter by negotiating with other members of a nosy, judgmental, sometimes irrational species.
http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
Why is why I never say anything even slightly controversial for the record under my True Name. I don't know about you but I rely on getting food and shelter by negotiating with other members of a nosy, judgmental, sometimes irrational species.
http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
So do I, but I'm not at all worried about saying controversial stuff.
Essentially you are saying that you are self-censoring.
Essentially you are saying that you are self-censoring.
Yes, that is exactly what he's saying, and moreover he seems to think he has reason to do so.
Just for example, if a potential employer running a PHP/MySQL shop could easily look up my opinion of their chosen tools, most would only hire me as a last resort if at all. Those tools are still popular enough that I would never bet my career on being able to avoid them indefinitely. (I'm more candid with my current manager now that we trust each other, in fact his views are stronger than mine.)
And that's without even getting into political views like IP law, or whatever the hell future landlords or neighbors might object to....
And that's without even getting into political views like IP law, or whatever the hell future landlords or neighbors might object to....
Judge a user not by the depth of their profile but by the quality of their previous comments and contributions.
Since we're appointing ourselves sheriff of hn now, how about we knock it off with the meta-posts.
I think people are capable of building a reputation based on the quality of their contributions. For many of us that don't have any kind of reputation that would be meaningful from our real identities we rely on building it on here.
That said, I would like it if people added things like a way to contact them. There have been times when I would like to contact people and there isn't really a good way to do it. I've been contacted from having my email address in my profile and made some good contacts through it as well.
That said, I would like it if people added things like a way to contact them. There have been times when I would like to contact people and there isn't really a good way to do it. I've been contacted from having my email address in my profile and made some good contacts through it as well.
The only time I really look at profiles is if I see people over and over again commenting on a large portion of the same things I comment on or like and it is just to see if they have a website or something like that.
So you really don't need to expose your full fledged identity but if you have a blog and like a bit of extra relevant traffic put it up on your profile page and it might get more visits.
One thing I would like to see more of is people responding when they downvote something because I always like to see the other side of the argument (other than those comments that have no merit whatsoever and should probably be flagged rather than, or perhaps in addition to, being downvoted.
Other than that my profile is blank because I don't really have anything to put there.
So you really don't need to expose your full fledged identity but if you have a blog and like a bit of extra relevant traffic put it up on your profile page and it might get more visits.
One thing I would like to see more of is people responding when they downvote something because I always like to see the other side of the argument (other than those comments that have no merit whatsoever and should probably be flagged rather than, or perhaps in addition to, being downvoted.
Other than that my profile is blank because I don't really have anything to put there.
>> step out of the shadows and tie your HN identity in with your real-life persona.
Has HN been acquired by the government for an undisclosed sum lately?
Has HN been acquired by the government for an undisclosed sum lately?
Yes, but your profile was blank so we couldn't mail you the memo...
I would rather have bias against my ideas because I am anonymous compared to bias for my ideas because of my accomplishments.
It depends if you want to let other accomplishments add weight to your argument, or let your argument stand on it's own. I prefer the latter.
It depends if you want to let other accomplishments add weight to your argument, or let your argument stand on it's own. I prefer the latter.
> There's an old internet joke, that on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.
woof!
> So, to all those that are for whatever reason anonymous here, step out of the shadows and tie your HN identity in with your real-life persona.
No thanks, I'm happy being another dog on the internet.
woof!
> So, to all those that are for whatever reason anonymous here, step out of the shadows and tie your HN identity in with your real-life persona.
No thanks, I'm happy being another dog on the internet.
I think I can see why ;) :
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1364225
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1364225
Nah, it's for stuff like this: http://twitter.com/epochwolf/status/14430334843
It would be a great loss to the world if you would no longer post stuff like that because you have your name out front.
I know you're being sarcastic but the problem is if I can't say stuff like that, what can I safely share under my real name? The internet is a safe place for me to share what I'm thinking. I don't have that freedom in real life.
That's pretty split to me. There isn't a thing that I'm thinking that I would speak out loud that I would not dare to commit in writing, and there isn't anybody of authority that I would look up to them with automatic respect so as to be deferential.
That got me in to a lot of trouble in my school days by the way, especially with religious teachers ;)
That got me in to a lot of trouble in my school days by the way, especially with religious teachers ;)
Kind of agreed, but for other reasons. It isn't important to me who you (the commenter) are in particular. However, a way to message you (the commenter) would be nice, short of having to post "Hey, mind emailing me? I'd like to talk to you about something."
How the method works is an irrelevant implementation detail (as long as its not an anonymous PO box, that is..). Really, an anonymous gmail thats checked once every few weeks would be fine most of the time.
Of course, I can just as easily understand why someone wouldn't want to be contacted. So, shrug.
How the method works is an irrelevant implementation detail (as long as its not an anonymous PO box, that is..). Really, an anonymous gmail thats checked once every few weeks would be fine most of the time.
Of course, I can just as easily understand why someone wouldn't want to be contacted. So, shrug.
As much as I completely understand remaining somewhat anonymous for privacy issues (my facespace acct is so overpopulated that I feel awfully muzzled), I often click through to a poster's profile not so much to check out their name or reputation, but because I'm interested in reading more of their thoughts or checking out their projects.
I filled my profile out a little more, but I'm honestly pretty boring to everyone I know with the exception of my dog!
I filled my profile out a little more, but I'm honestly pretty boring to everyone I know with the exception of my dog!
I just added a bit more to mine.
I've been spouting my beliefs on the interwebs long enough that am unelectable to any political office.
I've been spouting my beliefs on the interwebs long enough that am unelectable to any political office.
I haven't achieved anything of relevance yet. But I don't think that makes my opinion irrelevant.
Thanks for the encouragement. I just updated mine. Feedback appreciated :)
My profile is blank.
So is my life.
So is my life.
The way to let people know that you're not a dog, is to establish an identity, maybe a short blurb about yourself and a way to contact you out-of-band.
Lots of HN profiles are blank, and the nicknames used are anonymous. Of course, the theory is that since we are all judging your writings by their merits it is just as good to get that information you just wrote from an anonymous source as it would be to get it from a source that has an identity.
To me that would matter, for one when someone is attaching their name - and by extension their reputation - to their words they automatically have something to lose by saying it.
Second, it helps to verify that they are real people with relevant experience, instead of posers.
Anonymity on the net has its uses, for instance for whistleblowers and to ask embarrassing questions.
But for the most part it is used as a shield for cowardly attacks, sockpuppets and to create a persona with a reputation that is larger than the one the person is really entitled to and so on.
Being yourself is more than enough. So, to all those that are for whatever reason anonymous here, step out of the shadows and tie your HN identity in with your real-life persona.
Anonymous cowards belong to that other site :)