互联网与文化paulgraham.com编辑精选
我从 Hacker News 学到的
What I've Learned from Hacker News
2009 — 2022，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
Paul Graham 回顾创办 Hacker News 十个月来的心得：如何通过软性手段抑制用户行为劣化、为什么刻意压低增长速度、以及编辑干预与社区自治之间的平衡。文中还顺带透露了 Digg 早期靠人工编辑挑选头条的秘辛。
为什么经久不衰：这是创始人对社区治理最坦诚的复盘，其中关于'稀释以行为而非用户数衡量'的洞见，至今仍是所有在线社区运营的参考。
HN 评论精选
积分贬值削弱了投票的意义和用户的参与感
我认为很多增长问题可能源于 karma 的贬值。当初我发评论时，每一票都像是一个真实聪明的认可，5 分就算不错的成绩；现在每票的分量轻多了，投票带来的影响力和责任感也随之下降，这改变了整个社区的文化。
dcurtis查看英文原文
I think a lot of the growth problems might have to do with the devaluation of karma. The solution to this might actually raise the quality of comments and front page stories. When I posted a comment here a year and a half ago, I felt like each vote was a real, actual smart person praising or agreeing with what I had said. Each point had a lot of meaning, and back then 5 points was considered a pretty good score. Now each point means much less for some reason. I'm not sure why. Maybe it's because I don't trust each individual person as much. For example, as I write this, the top comment is about someone using a script to submit this article. It's two sentences, and it has received eleven votes. To me, each of those individual votes mean less than they used to. The net effect of one vote, for the whole culture of hacker news, has gone down significantly. This reduces the total perception of worth for each user, and, more importantly, for each voting action. Back in the beginning, I felt like I had some amount of power, in that if I voted something up it would literally rise in the list. In fact, I felt like I had some sort of responsibility. Now that active, obvious change in story rank rarely happens, so I feel like my vote is somewhat worthless. I tend to mostly agree that the quality level of submissions and comments has stayed the same during the growth of this site, but the devaluation of karma has led to other cultural changes. There's something comforting about sharing ideas within a small group of people because you feel like you have real influence, and I think I'm starting to lose that feeling here. There are so many new faces that my perception of quality has gone down, even if the actual net level of quality for each item has stayed the same. Seeing many posts with 100+ karma on the front page recently has kind of solidified that feeling for me. Who are these hundreds of people?
HN 的吸引力在于'感觉有用'，应区分即时兴趣与实际价值
HN 让人上瘾，是因为上面都是我们觉得'将来可能有用'的东西，我们像跳蚤市场上的囤积者。建议增加一种延迟投票，比如一个月后才能投，含义是'这确实对我的工作有用'，从而区分即时兴趣和真正价值。
davi查看英文原文
What a disaster that would be, to attract thousands of smart people to a site that caused them to waste lots of time. I wish I could be 100% sure that's not a description of HN. The reason HN is so addictive is because it is filled with things we think might be useful someday. We're like pack rats at a flea market. The question is, what utility do we get out of what we find here? Idea: maybe there could be a second class of upvote, which could only be given, say, a week, or a month after a story or comment was submitted. The meaning of this upvote would be, "This proved to be useful to me professionally." And so, in addition to HN/best and HN/bestcomments, there could be HN/useful and HN/usefulcomments. Anway, thanks again for the site, Paul, and please keep experimenting. Watching you experiment is at least as interesting as any particular post.
HN 的目标是内容质量而非民主，但删除操作应透明
一个会杀死投稿的网站应该让用户能看到被删的内容，这能让编辑保持诚实。但 HN 的目标不是民主，而是'对黑客有趣'，投票和投稿只是达成这个目标的手段。
JoelSutherland查看英文原文
I think it's important that a site that kills submissions provide a way for users to see what got killed if they want to. That keeps editors honest, and just as importantly, makes users confident they'd know if the editors stopped being honest. I think on HN, editor transparency is less important than story Quality. Reddit and Digg were built explicitly around some democratic idea of deciding what stories should be displayed on the front page. While both have their problems living up to this, it is their stated objective. Hacker News has a different objective. It's goal is to be interesting to Hackers. I really could care less about democracy and I think others would agree. Submissions and voting are just a means to the "hacker interesting" end.
猜测 Digg 头条实为人工编辑挑选，并好奇 Viaweb 的类似秘辛
很多创业公司都有早期不得不耍的某些手段，我猜 Digg 的秘密就是头条实际上由人工编辑挑选。顺便问一句：Viaweb 的秘密是什么？
fallentimes查看英文原文
A lot of startups have some kind of secret about the subterfuges they had to resort to in the early days, and I suspect Digg's is the extent to which the top stories were de facto chosen by human editors. These also make for excellent reads. What was Viaweb's? :)
pg 本人确认文章观点至今仍然成立，只是规模变大了
这篇文章和我今天要写的几乎一模一样，最大的区别只是数字：现在工作日每天约有 15 万独立 IP 和 150 万页面浏览量。
pg查看英文原文
It's remarkably close to what I'd write today. The biggest difference now is the numbers. Now on a typical weekday we get about 150k unique IPs and 1.5m pageviews.
即使靠行为约束，点赞机制仍无法保证评论质量
pg 在文中说'稀释更多体现在行为而非用户上，要防的是坏行为而非坏人'。但 2011 年他又发帖承认 HN 仍有问题：刻薄和愚蠢的评论被大量点赞——说明点赞数并不可靠地反映评论质量。
tokenadult查看英文原文
In the submitted article from February 2009, Paul Graham wrote, "Probably the most important thing I've learned about dilution is that it's measured more in behavior than users. It's bad behavior you want to keep out more than bad people. User behavior turns out to be surprisingly malleable. If people are expected to behave well, they tend to; and vice versa. "Though of course forbidding bad behavior does tend to keep away bad people, because they feel uncomfortably constrained in a place where they have to behave well. But this way of keeping them out is gentler and probably also more effective than overt barriers." Trying to set barriers to bad user behavior has been an ongoing problem. In March 2011, pg wrote that Hacker News was still having user behavior problems, under the title "Ask HN: How to stave off decline of HN?" http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2403696 He wrote, "The problem has several components: comments that are (a) mean and/or (b) dumb that (c) get massively upvoted." So the founder of Hacker News thought then that there was a comment voting problem: (a) mean comments were getting too many upvotes, and (b) dumb comments were getting too many upvotes, and (c) too many of the comments that got the most upvotes were either mean or dumb or both. Let's stop and think about what that means. That means that, according to pg posting as of last year, two more years after the article submitted here, comment karma scores were often NOT reliable signals of good comments, comments worth finding rapidly when skimming a thread. So pg changed the Hacker News software a few days later so that comment karma scores were hidden from Hacker News readers (they are STILL visible to each person who makes a comment, on his or her own comments). You can check the scores of each of your own comments. We can all READ comments to see which comments are the good comments. (Better comments also tend in general to thread to the top of discussions, with some other rules also influencing that evaluation as "better.") Checking the results of the software change involves empirical investigation. How do the highest-voted comments visible in the bestcomments list http://news.ycombinator.com/bestcomments look to all of you recently? Are there fewer mean comments than two years ago? Are there fewer dumb comments than two years ago? Are the comments that are "massively upvoted" since the experiment began mostly comments that are reasonably kind and well-informed, helpful comments on the whole? In most of the treads you visit, do helpful, thoughtful comments seem to rise to a position of prominence, while mean or dumb comments gray out? In my observation, after 1345 days here, and rather active participation on Hacker News, the comments have improved both in the threads I post in and in the threads I only lurk in. Occasional checks of the best comments page STILL reveal a lot of high-ranked comments that consist of one-liner jokes or whining about something, so the signal provided by upvotes still isn't perfect, but looking at the average comment karma score of some users I've been following for years suggests that comment karma is better allocated now than it was two years ago, which as I said is also my impression when I look at particular threads under submitted stories. There may be some more changes yet to make, but Hacker News has scaled up some more and still managed to emphasize quality of comments, which is not an easy thing to do.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
如今电脑上几乎所有操作在感知上都比 1983 年更慢（2017）
Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
2017 年的推文串认为，尽管计算机硬件比 1983 年快得多，日常操作的感知速度却常常更慢：启动、界面响应和网络应用被层层抽象、动画、后台检查与网络依赖拖累。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2017–2020twitter.com网站肥胖危机
The Website Obesity Crisis
Maciej Cegłowski（idlewords）的经典演讲文稿《网站肥胖症危机》，批评现代网页越来越臃肿：动辄数 MB 的 JavaScript、追踪脚本和广告，把本可以轻…
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2016–2021idlewords.com编辑精选亚马逊那本标价 23,698,655.93 美元的苍蝇书
Amazon’s $23,698,655.93 book about flies
博文讲的是亚马逊上一本关于果蝇的二手书被标到 23,698,655.93 美元。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2011–2022michaeleisen.org浏览器 User-Agent 字符串的历史
History of the browser user-agent string (2008)
2008 年的经典文章用戏谑的“创世纪”口吻，讲述浏览器 User-Agent 字符串如何从简单的标识演变成层层叠加的伪装：浏览器为了绕过按 UA 分发的网站检测，纷纷把自己伪装…
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2012–2022webaim.org编辑精选最后的问题——艾萨克·阿西莫夫
The Last Question - Isaac Asimov
阿西莫夫最著名的短篇科幻小说《最后的问题》的在线全文。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2009–2019multivax.com编辑精选