Recent submissions

Comment · 3 years ago
That is not what I’m saying at all though? The article is literally a defense of the existing system which allows those that own valuable assets to keep them and price them accordingly.

The closing paragraph was more to point out that if you do want to encourage development of domains and prevent squatting and overcharging - regulation could be a way to achieve that. I’m not endorsing the view just commenting that that’s a way real estate deals with the problem.

Comment · 3 years ago
Yeah fair point.
Comment · 3 years ago
What's the alternative if not based on commercial activity? Lottery?
Comment · 4 years ago
This post crops up enough and annoys me enough that I wrote a full response to it: https://floverfelt.org/posts/it-is-your-responsibility-to-re...

It's pretty sad that we've reached the point of spamming close friends just to get their attention, though I understand exactly what he's talking about. I just don't think it translates at all to a knowledge work setting.

Comment · 4 years ago
Comment · 5 years ago
Yeah that's a good point. The randomness is introduced by the opposing player and is not intrinsic to the game itself.

As opposed to Sudoku or something where there's only a single player and thus no room for randomness to be introduced at all or games where's it's intrinsic (poker, backgammon, etc.)

Comment · 5 years ago
> cognitive science, linguistics, and anthropology.

Would love to hear your thoughts on this, esp. the linguistics and anthropology piece.

Comment · 5 years ago
Yeah, I'm actually a pretty big fan of Java programming. It gets a lot of hate on HN for things that have been mostly solved or can be solved if you implement it a certain way.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton