username923409

You should try reading past the first page of the article before making a judgment like that.

That's a different article

If it was (more) moderated it would just be sterile, boring, and less true to reality. The entire point is to label areas with the most obviously applicable stereotype, and for that it's doing a great job.

are the fonts very green at 1x size (setting at the top) for anyone else? for an extreme example, the dense mesh pattern at the end of "continuous characters" is filled with light green instead of white on my display. just wondering if this is an artifact of my subpixel font antialiasing settings or if that's baked in...

I really like the idea but it seems that rule 5. is broken in basically every article that I check, usually very explicitly. For example, on the "Earth" article: "Unlike in our timeline, where Pluto was unexpectedly destroyed in 2001, this version of Earth has maintained Pluto's status..."

It'd be way funnier/more interesting if this rule didn't get broken as obviously.

Not sure if this is the same kind of "endless loop" that I've experience on the Cloudflare captcha page; while on a VPN, the only way I can get past the "I am a Human" captcha is to refresh the page and click the area where the checkbox appears as fast as I can with my mouse before it even appears. It might take two or three tries, but it hasn't failed yet.

I have no idea why this works so well, but I haven't found another way (other than getting off of my VPN) to get past this screening page.

CS2 (the topical game of the post) allows for playing exactly how you outlined to be the "ideal" way. however, this method of playing will never* come back to be the most popular way to play the game. so, i don't see the harm in this attempt at a contribution to counteract the largest problem with the most popular way of playing.

* at least until there are so few players searching for matchmaking games that it never succeeds in finding a lobby, of course. see diabotical for example ;-(

this is my first account, and i understand your perspective. i did sometimes come to HN from 2015 onwards, but not enough to really get a feel for the level of content and conversation that happened. 2015 is still much later than you first started using it, so i can see how your older first impressions of this site led you to the conclusion that present-day HN is a shadow of its former self.

so i think we agree on everything, except that you're comparing pre-2016 to now, vs. me comparing 2020 to now, which leads to the opposite conclusions. excuse me for being a part of the less interesting era of posters ;-)

i did read the article but didn't come to the conclusion that "Eternal September" is here. although i don't argue that the quality of posts has gone up recently, i do believe that many of the new users of 2022/2023 have become - or will become - the high quality posters that attracted them here initially. as i said in the first post, i think this is true because there hasn't been an unprecedented spike in new users.

basically, quality(new user + time) = quality(old user), as long as the proportion of new users/old users remains small. of course it's subjective as to where you put this value though. i just think it hasn't been reached yet here.