> I am kind of amazed how negative the comments are here, especially on HN.

I can't recall or point out exactly when, but there is a stark before/after moment where the opinions of anything pg went from "Interesting and maybe true in some ways" to what we see today, lots of knee-jerk reactions and hardly any comments about the actual content.

Hazarding a guess, I think the moment Altman became the CEO and later during COVID, the sentiment seemed to have been shifting towards what we see today. But this is all based on hazy memory, rather than looking at the data. I'm sure there is a blog post waiting to be written about analyzing the sentiment of comments to PGs articles on HN, and you'll see a shift somewhere.

▲

trentor 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Because at some point in life everyone gets tired of fairytales. He started mending the anecdotes to his content which always rubs people the wrong way.

▲

embedding-shape an hour ago | parent [-]

So, this comment of yours obviously isn't in the "knee-jerk reaction" category of comments, I suppose? What exactly from the linked tweet(s) are fairytales here? There is hardly any text at all, so strikes me as a comment about previous pg content, but then this would be one of those comments I talk about? Very confusing.

	▲	trentor an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Your hand waving doesn't make it knee-jerk. It's just what happened to his writing since COVID. He goes for more of a shock and awe style and not everybody likes it. He's been writing for over 20 years now, hasn't he? His style has clearly changed, and an changing style attracts a different audience so it's no surprise his original readers might not connect with his newer work...

▲

2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

latexr 31 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

> I can't recall or point out exactly when, but there is a stark before/after moment where the opinions of anything pg went from "Interesting and maybe true in some ways" to what we see today, lots of knee-jerk reactions and hardly any comments about the actual content.

Hard disagree. This submission is still being highly upvoted, while another recent post[1] on the harms caused by Graham’s fellows[2], with a fairly tame comment section, has been flagged. That is a constant on HN. It’s not a fluke, it’s as predictable as the sunrise and getting more pronounced.

I’m sure we’re both biased in our perceptions. Mine is that HN in general (certainly more than any other website) used to worship[3] everything he wrote, together with others like Musk, until things started to really go to shit and many eyes have been opened to the effects of the unfettered greed of rich tech guys out of touch with reality.[4]

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49411762

[2]: A better English word is escaping me.

[3]: That word I choose hyperbolically but deliberately. It definitely was not “interesting and maybe true in some ways”, it was much more hardcore than that.

[4]: That is not “knee-jerk” but a slow realisation still ongoing.

▲

embedding-shape 22 minutes ago | parent [-]

> Mine is that HN in general (certainly more than any other website) used to worship[3] everything he wrote [...] It definitely was not “interesting and maybe true in some ways”, it was much more hardcore than that.

I guess it depends on what submission you look at, previous comment of mine solely based on memory. Now I went to https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=twitter.com/paulg, clicked "More" a bunch of times, and seems my memory was more or less correct, none of the submissions I clicked on are "pg worship" (hyperbolic or not). Just one example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19418701

Maybe you need to enable "Show Dead" or something? Pgs articles on HN definitely never was free of any critique in the HN comments, just like any article. Although I do agree with you that it used to be different than it is today, and same with Musk too, and Altman, and probably more individuals, where they were lauded before but now pretty much just mentioning them poisons the conversation.

	▲	latexr 3 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> Just one example That post has barely any points and comments. It’s not a good indicator of general sentiment, it’s just an indicator of people who were on HN at that time. > Maybe you need to enable "Show Dead" or something? I have it enabled. > Pgs articles on HN definitely never was free of any critique in the HN comments, just like any article. Of course. I very explicitly wrote “in general (certainly more than any other website)”. That does not mean “always”, or “never”. HN is not a hive mind, there’s never going to be 100% agreement. The general trend is what’s being discussed, and we both agree that in general the sentiment on Graham used to be higher. We’re just disagreeing (though through conversation we may be able to find ourselves agreeing) on where exactly it is now and how to interpret it.