Hey benologist,
I can see you're frustrated by the frequent submissions that The Mac Observer and other tech sites make to HN. I've read a lot of your commentary on the topic and I agree with many of your points.
In my own personal opinion, it's not cool to simply dump every article that a site publishes to places like HN, Reddit, etc. I also agree that a lot of sites generate content solely as "link bait," fill their articles with useless internal links, and offer no real substance other than to re-report what some other site said.
However, in this case, and in the relatively few articles I've submitted to HN and other places (check my profile), I think that the content is both original and of general interest to the HN community.
I'm not going to lie: there's definitely a problem with many sites "spamming" HN, but in some cases there's arguably a legitimate reason to submit a story. If you don't agree, could you please elaborate on why?
As for me, I'll continue to submit infrequent stories from The Mac Observer and other sites that I think offer original perspective and are of potential interest. If you think this is unreasonable, please let me know.
I wish they would/could also include Snow Leopard in this comparison. I lost about 20-30% of my battery life after upgrading to Lion, so the further reduction seems pretty horrible. Guess I'll be waiting a little longer still before upgrading to Mountain Lion.
Hi toadkick,
That's a great idea. Our 2011 MacBook Pro that we used in the test can run 10.6, so this weekend I'll see if I can roll it back and run the tests on Snow Leopard for comparison.
My very very unscientific personal test from earlier today (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4423422) ended up showing pretty similar results. Ultimately it died about an hour or two before it "should", but it's a noticeable improvement.
How many tests did they run with each configuration? What is the margin of error on the results? The article mentions differences of just a few minutes at least twice, but I strongly doubt the tests are accurate enough to distinguish at that level. I certainly get the impression that each configuration was tested once, which means the results are practically useless.
[+] [-] benologist|13 years ago|reply
- http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=tanousjm
- http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=jmartellaro
- http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=digiwizard
- http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=davethenerd
- http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=Semteksam
[+] [-] tanousjm|13 years ago|reply
In my own personal opinion, it's not cool to simply dump every article that a site publishes to places like HN, Reddit, etc. I also agree that a lot of sites generate content solely as "link bait," fill their articles with useless internal links, and offer no real substance other than to re-report what some other site said.
However, in this case, and in the relatively few articles I've submitted to HN and other places (check my profile), I think that the content is both original and of general interest to the HN community.
I'm not going to lie: there's definitely a problem with many sites "spamming" HN, but in some cases there's arguably a legitimate reason to submit a story. If you don't agree, could you please elaborate on why?
As for me, I'll continue to submit infrequent stories from The Mac Observer and other sites that I think offer original perspective and are of potential interest. If you think this is unreasonable, please let me know.
[+] [-] joshu|13 years ago|reply
I did spam mitigation for years elsewhere. This stuff still makes me twitch.
[+] [-] toadkick|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tanousjm|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jval|13 years ago|reply
Please spend part of your enormous amount of cash reserves building a crack team to fix this.
Regards,
Users.
[+] [-] evoxed|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikeash|13 years ago|reply